Skip to main content

About your Search

20130126
20130203
SPONSOR
SHOW
( more )
STATION
KQED (PBS) 17
KRCB (PBS) 14
WRC (NBC) 11
WHUT (Howard University Television) 10
KGO (ABC) 7
( more )
LANGUAGE
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 563 (some duplicates have been removed)
MSNBC
Jan 31, 2013 11:00am PST
quote ? will you correct or incorrect when you said that the surge would be the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since until nam? were you correct or incorrect? yes or no? >> my reference -- >> are you -- the question is,
CSPAN
Feb 3, 2013 5:35am EST
these foreign policy issues. leon is literary editor since 1983 and the author of nuclear war, nuclear peace against identity. i might mention that tonight is the relaunch of the new republic. it is really a new era and everyone is excited about that. we will be leaving to go to the new republic party. this is how it is going to go. we will start with 10 minutes from each team. leon will talk about why the u.s. should do more in the syria. that we will hear from josh and aaron on why the u.s. should not go any further. then the leon and bob will rebut their argument. i will begin a discussion by grilling the one or both of the teams on their arguments. the other side will have a chance to respond. each team will have three minutes to answer questions. their answers strike -- somebody could come and uniform and escort you out. let's get to it with bob k. again and leon on why the u.s. should be doing more in syria. >> thank you. thank you senator john mccain who is a national hero for the work he has been doing in the senate all of these years. i just use up some of my time, bu
CSPAN
Jan 27, 2013 7:00pm EST
washington. the writing has appeared in "the new york times," "politico," foreign policy and washington monthly among others. they came to us last night from virginia, took a late night train and what i'd like to do is turn it over to you for your thoughts and comments to start off. >> thank you very much. i'm going to start for us today. let me thank you much for hosting us to thank you for coming. it's an honor pleasure and we look forward to nature scene discussion today. i'm going to start with two provocative themes from our new book, "going to tehran: why the united states must come to terms with the islamic republic of iran". the first of these means, and these two get at the heart of our book. the united states is today enhanced and for the past two years a power and relative decline in the middle east. the second core team as the biggest beneficiary of american ongoing decline in the middle east is the islamic republic of iran. if you're not sure you agree with these propositions, i want to ask you to compare the relative position of the united states and the islamic
MSNBC
Feb 3, 2013 8:00am EST
service, praise israel or gently lead the witness back to approved foreign policy bromides and away tr dangerous taboos. >> your commitment that i ran should not under any circumstances have had ability to have a nuclear weapon. and i appreciate that position very much. >> and i appreciate your taking the time to meet with me. we had an extensive discussion and your understanding of the complex challenges we face in the middle east and the importance of our alliance with israel. >> i would like for you as the committee is getting to know you, know something about your service in vietnam and your combat experience. were you wounded, senator hagel? >> finally, there was the nominee himself, who appeared to have prepared for the hearing by skimming a few briefing talking points on his cab right to the capital and who rather than defending some of hits comments on foreign policy, the importance of exhausting every chance of peace rather than leaping into the horrors of war, the dysfunctional congressional politics of israel/palestine, he seemed resign to glumly recant. >> name one person,
MSNBC
Jan 27, 2013 8:00am EST
africa and i think that's one core part of the legacy of the first administration's foreign policy and hillary clinton's tenure at state and i think the defining external event to the administration of foreign policy has been the arab spring, obviously, and all that uncorked and how to manage that. but before we get to that, we still have robin on satellite. i want to talk about the relationship between the president and hillary clinton and the degree to which the legacy of foreign policy in the first term has been hillary clinton's legacy and the degree to which it really has been -- the shots have been called from the white house because a lot of reporting on this has been very interesting. tonight there's going to be an interview on "60 minutes" that's a joint interview between the president and hillary clinton, a joint exit interview, and this is what the president had to say about hillary clinton's legacy. >> hillary will go down as one of the finest secretary of states we've had. it has been a great collaboration over the last four years. i'm going to miss her. i wish she was sti
FOX News
Feb 2, 2013 4:00am EST
left america's foreign policy in stronger or weaker position. most think the future lies with china than the u.s. it's not all mrs. clinton's fault. but the fact is we just don't have the influence we used to have around the world from syria to mali, we have led from behind, so in effect the former secretary of state has helped manage our decline in what looks increasingly like a post american world. and that's the memo. now on to the top story. another view on this, joining us now from new york, fox news contributor julie ragenski and former advisor to frank lautenberg and president rosenberg a center left think tank and campaign advisor to president clinton. all right, simon, tell me, where did i go wrong there on judging mrs. clinton? highly intelligent, global celebrity. >> yep. >> incredible run from first lady to senator to secretary. why was this a great tenure as secretary of state? >> first of all agrow agree with the negative characterization. i think we are safer today in the world than when barack obama took office. i think there have within two central legacies from her
WHUT
Feb 2, 2013 10:00am EST
focus of american foreign policy. and i didn't do it because it was a nice thing to do or it was some pet project of mine. i did it because the evidence is overwhelming. countries that deny political and social rights to women and girls are more unstable, more likely to breed extremism, more likely to threaten the united states. countries that deny economic opportunities to women and girls, rooted in education and business and investment are not going to be as prosperous as they might otherwise be. so it became clear that if i was going to be traveling around talking about diplomacy and development, urging changes in economic structures, introducing what we call economic statecraft to be a central pillar of our foreign policy you had to talk about women and girls and so i've tried to do that. >> restrictions on women's economic participation are costing us massive amounts of economic growth and income in every region of the world. >> this work, ensuring that women are equal partners, as they should be, and are free to realize their own god-given potential, was one of the great pi
MSNBC
Jan 31, 2013 10:00am EST
extreme and chuck schumer would not endorse somebody, his views on foreign policy are middle of the road. he wouldn't endorse somebody who was extreme. i think his vietnam experience is important. it's been noted and it's important that you now have at state john kerry and you would have at defense chuck hagel, two veterans of vietnam who look back and say we are ib clind to be very cautious before we commit american lives to any kind of foreign intervention. we want to be able to tell the troops. and hagel has characterized himself as an old sergeant, wants to tell the truth, so we need to make this fight. i think the good thing this hearing if it went there instead of just kind of particular attacks or questions to hagel, if this hearing went to a larger discussion of president obama's foreign policy because in broad terms hagel is with obama. obama's view is this is a moment when we need to pull back a bit, rebuild at home, and rethink some of these commitments. the americans are tired of war at this moment, and i think hagel really represents that exhaustion with the war and the
CSPAN
Jan 27, 2013 9:00am EST
," politico, foreign policy and washington monthly, among others. they came to us last night from virginia. they took the late night train and stayed here. and what i'd like to do is just turn it over to you for your thoughts and comments to start off. >> well, thank you very much. i'm going to start off for us today. let me start by thanking you for hosting us. it's a real honor and pleasure, and we look forward to an interesting discussion today. i'm going to start with two provocative themes from our new book, "going to tehran: why the united states must come to terms with the islam you can republic of iran." the first of these themes, and these two really get at the heart of our book. the first of these themes is that the united states is today and has been for the past few years a power in relative decline in the middle east. and the second core theme is that the biggest beneficiary of america's ongoing decline in the middle east is the islamic republic of iran. if you're not sure you agree with these propositions, i want to ask you to compare the relative positions of the un
NBC
Jan 27, 2013 8:00am PST
faces some critical challenges as the president's foreign policy opens a new chapter. president's foreign policy opens a new[ male announcer ] i've seen incredible things. otherworldly things. but there are some things i've never seen before. this ge jet engine can understand 5,000 data samples per second. which is good for business. because planes use less fuel, spend less time on the ground and more time in the air. suddenly, faraway places don't seem so...far away. ♪ there's natural gas under my town. it's a game changer. ♪ it means cleaner, cheaper american-made energy. but we've got to be careful how we get it. design the wells to be safe. thousands of jobs. use the most advanced technology to protect our water. billions in the economy. at chevron, if we can't do it right, we won't do it at all. we've got to think long term. we've got to think long term. ♪ we've got to think long term. we've got to think long term. (announcer) scottrade knows our and invest their own way. with scottrade's smart text, i can quickly understand my charts, and spend more time trading. their
FOX News
Feb 1, 2013 5:00pm PST
policy. i think that, you know, for 20 years foreign policy wasn't a major issue in the democratic party. whether it was globalization or opposition to the iraq war. we didn't real solid a forward leaning fiewrd policy. i think we have reestablished our commitment to free trade. democracy promotion. >> laura: how is it forward-leaning given what we didn't do in iran when we had -- looked like we had a real popular vote going there we really didn't do anything. in syria, there is debate what we should do there, nevertheless, clearly our policy there is a little bit confusing. >> clearly very forward leaning in the war on terror. clearly significantly involved in libya and egypt and trying to push things forward there. >> laura: even a lot of liberals were criticizing her. even people who like her. >> the second legacy for her is going to be about the asia. you raised. >> is america stronger or weaker than she was four years ago. >> i think america is stronger today. >> laura: on what measure? more people are looking to our country for leadership than they were four years ago. >> fewer peo
MSNBC
Jan 26, 2013 3:00pm EST
administration, kerry is basically at the end of the day carrying a foreign policy set by the president and if you were going do it, we would have done it already and now with the mess that has become syria where you have islamic militant groups, you have assad militias running around and we have kurdish groups running around, i think the u.s. is scared of getting involved. >> i was struck by something that you said on inauguration day. you talked about the glaring absence of discussion in the foreign policy in the president's speech. how did you characterize this president's approach to foreign policy? >> i think he doesn't want to deal with it, frankly. a lot of people in this country would agree with him. i think this administration would much rather focus on guns and taxes and other social issues and not deal with the quagmire that is the middle east. the bush years were deep in iraq and afghanistan trying to get between the sunni and shia fight and i think this administration would rather not deal with it. sounds great, but i don't think that's an option because the foreign policy and the
MSNBC
Jan 28, 2013 9:00am PST
vandenberg became an internationalist huge deal in american foreign policy in the late 1940s. if -- >> like when -- >> if there are two people that would get it. if this is a real deal, what you say, with talk radio -- >> i think it is. >> moving on this issue, and i think the bill -- >> let's also keep in mind that the democrats are trying to turn texas blue. there is work afoot to capitalize on the demographic question here. >> jody, this is my question. i feel like we're -- this is a big moment for the republican party in terms of brand and also policy. i haut this was an incredible moment when jim demint is asked about the comments that colin powell made about a dark vein of intolerance, the racism within the republican party, and also republican comments on legitimate rape and this is how jim demint, who is now president or incoming president of the heritage foundation, presumably a leading voice among conservatives, this is his answer. >> do you regret some of the comments about abortion, about rape. again, what colin powell were vailed racist comments from the party. >> david, the fa
MSNBC
Jan 27, 2013 2:00pm EST
foreign policy opens a new chapter. it's among the topics we will tackle with our political roundtable up next after this break. you can prevent gas with beano meltaways, or treat gas with these after you get it. now that's like sunblock before or sun burn cream later. oh, somebody out there's saying, now i get it! take beano before and there'll be no gas. [ coughs ] ♪ [ male announcer ] you can't let a cold keep you up tonight. vicks nyquil -- powerful nighttime 6-symptom cold & flu relief. ♪ >>> we're back with our roundtable. president and ceo of naacp ben jealous. incoming president of the heritage foundation, former senator jim demint. nbc news special correspondent for rock center ted koppel. nbc's own ted koppel. and associate editor for "the washington post," bob woodward. and nbc's chief foreign affairs correspondent andrea mitchell. welcome to all of you. a lot to get to. and as we react to paul ryan this morning, i want to show some of the headlines from the president's inaugural address. obama offers a liberal vision. we must act. charles krauthammer wrote this in "the
MSNBC
Jan 28, 2013 2:00am EST
prepares for his new assignment, he faces some critical challenges as the president's foreign policy opens critica[ female announcer ] imagine skin so healthy, it never gets dry again. can your moisturizer do that? [ female announcer ] dermatologist recommended aveeno has an oat formula, now proven to build a moisture reserve, so skin can replenish itself. that's healthy skin for life. only from aveeno. hmm, we need a new game. ♪ that'll save the day. ♪ so will bounty select-a-size. it's the smaller powerful sheet. the only one with trap + lock technology. look! one select-a-size sheet of bounty is 50% more absorbent than a full size sheet of the leading ordinary brand. use less. with the small but powerful picker upper, bounty select-a-size. and having an investment expert like northern trust by your side makes all the difference. we add precision to your portfolio construction by directly matching your assets and your risk preferences against your own unique life goals. we call it goals driven investing. after all, you don't climb a mountain just to sit at the top. you look around fo
MSNBC
Jan 28, 2013 4:00am EST
foreign policy opens stress sweat. it's different than ordinary sweat. it smells worse, and it can happen any time -- to anyone! like when i ran to catch the train to work and a draft blew my skirt up and everybody here saw my unmentionables. yeah, and they aren't even cute. hello, laundry day. no... stress sweat can happen to anyone, anytime -- and it smells worse than ordinary sweat. get 4x the protection against stress sweat. introducing new secret clinical strength stress response scent. ♪ introducing new secret clinical strength stress response scent. i need you. i feel so alone. but you're not alone. i knew you'd come. like i could stay away. you know i can't do this without you. you'll never have to. you're always there for me. shh! i'll get you a rental car. i could also use an umbrella. fall in love with progressive's claims service. >>> we're black back /* back with our roundtable. president and ceo of naacp ben jealous. incoming president of the heritage foundation, former senator jim demint. nbc news special correspondent for rock center ted koppel. nbc's own ted koppel. and
NBC
Jan 28, 2013 2:05am EST
increases with obama care. new tax increases at the beginning of this month. and now they are calling for even more tax increases, and they are not calling to cut spending. they are calling for spending increases. so basically what they're saying is, they want americans to pay more so washington can spend more. that's not going to help the economy, and that is not going to close the gap and balance the budget. the reason we want to balance the budget is not to make the numbers add up. we think that's necessary for growth and opportunity. we think it's necessary to make sure that our kids don't get this debt that they won't be able to handle if we keep going down the path we are on. >> but there are certainly those in the white house who would take issue with what you said or might even say to use your own criticism that's a straw man argume argument. they were prepared to cut additional spending to be part of a bigger agreement that republicans weren't able to agree to. there is more room for spending cuts. it's a matter of how you do it. >> the president was insisting on more stimulus spending during the fiscal cliff negotiations. he didn't get that. they haven't put out a plan. the reason we wanted the debt limit extended was to showcase our budget. we will put a budget up that says here is our plan for economic growth and balancing the budget, entitlement reform which is necessary to save medicare from bankruptcy and get this debt under control. the president hasn't offered any of those kinds of plans in public. they tried to do back room deals, but those seem to fall apart. we want to debate it in public to contrast these visions. >> i want to keep up with some terms you're using here. you say the president wants to raise tax rates. a lot of the democrats i talked to and even the white house said they are willing to do tax reform where there could be additional revenue. are you opposed to any additional revenue that could come from tax reform? >> we offered that back in the fiscal cliff negotiations. the president got his additional revenues. that's behind us. those higher revenues occurred, and now we need to focus on getting spending down. >> here is the leverage question. senator schumer said we didn't just get our revenues. we got some. there has to be more that are part of it. the president will say that. so as you are -- >> are we for more revenue? no, we are not. >> even if it's from tax reform? >> if you keep raising revenues, you're not going to get different tax reform. i know you didn't want a chart, but i'm kind of a chart guy. this dream line shows you the historic taxes. the red line is tax increases. the red line, where spending is going. spending is the problem. revenues aren't the problem. if you keep chasing higher spending with higher revenues as they're calling for, you're going to hurt economic growth. you'll never catch up. you'll shut down the economy and you won't get the budget down. >> when you were campaigning in virginia, a state you wanted to carry but didn't, you said, look, these sequestration cuts, these automatic spending cuts that are put in place because republicans and democrats can't agree, so you have to have this sword that comes down, you said we're not going to let those happen. those will not happen, those automatic spending cuts. well, now we have a new deadline coming up in a couple of months that says there's going to be more automatic spending cuts, the same ones that were in place before. >> that's right. >> are you going to let those happen? >> if mitt romney and i won the election, they would not have happened because we would have gone and worked with democrats and republicans in congress to put the budget on a path to balance and saved defense. i think the sequester is going to happen because that $1.2 trillion in spending cuts, we can't lose those spending cuts. and don't for get one other thing. i wrote legislation and passed it in the house twice to replace those sequesters with cuts in other areas of government. we have shown how to protect defense spending by cutting spending in other areas. in our budget last year, we did take money out of defense. just not nearly as much as the president seems to want to. but we think the sequesters will happen because the democrats have opposed our efforts to replace those cuts with others and offered no alternatives. >> is this worth shutting the government down over? >> no one is talking about shutting the government down. >> well, it's a piece of the leverage that conservatives have. you didn't want to fight over the debt ceiling because you thought you can't do that, you have to pay the government's bills. do you think this fight over priority is worth shutting the government down? >> we're not interested in shutting the government down. what happens on march 1 is spending goes down automatically. march 27 is when the moment you're talking about, the continuing resolution expires. we are more than happy to keep spending at those levels going on into the future while we debate how to balance the budget, grow the economy, create economic opportunity. that's the kind of debate the country deserves. by the way, if we keep going down this path, we will have a debt crisis. it's not an if question. it's a when question. this isn't a republican or democrat thing. it's a math thing. we have to get serious with this problem if we want to save people from the problems that result from a debt crisis. >> let me challenge you from a critic further on the left. a lot of the centrist economists may disagree with you in some areas but agree about the impending debt crisis. some on the left disagree, calls you a deficit scold and worse than that. but the point is you're being alarmist about the deficit and its relationship to how the economy performs and grows. here's what he wrote in his column on friday. it was in fact a good thing that the deficit was allowed to rise as the economy slumped. with private spending plunging as the housing bubble popped, the willingness of the government to keep spending was one of the main reasons we didn't experience a full replay of the great depression. and the balance now between austerity, which he believes you call for, and appropriate investment on the part of the government is still a great tension. >> we can debate that. it's clear that doesn't work. we're not preaching austerity. we are preaching growth and opportunity. what we are saying is if you get our fiscal ship fixed, you preempt austerity. here's what a debt crisis is. it's what they have in europe, which is austerity. you cut the safety net immediately. cut retirement benefits for people already retired. slow down the economy, and young people don't have job. that's the austerity that comes with a debt crisis. if you keep stacking up trillion dollar deficits, it's bringing us to that moment. our goal is to prevent and preempt austerity to get back to growth. >> the question i have is who's really with? you a lot of the business community, natural allies, have kind of come around to the president's way of thinking saying, look, you know, get more revenues if you want them. raise tax rates if you need them. just get something done. silicon valley, a lot of the innovators in the country, big job creators, big idea people, not natural allies of your way of thinking. so that's the question. who's really with you? >> i don't know if i agree with that. they believe we should have tax reform. we have the highest corporate tax rate in the world. we are taxing our small businesses at rates higher than corporations. when we tax our job creators more than our foreign competitors tax theirs, they win. we lose. >> he's not really for that. >> he says so, but he has yet to put out a vision or agreement to make good on these promises. we hear the rhetoric but never see the results. and more importantly, businesses know we have to close this deficit. businesses know we can't keep spending money we just don't have. businesses budget. washington hasn't had a budget for four years. the president and his party have been in charge of washington during this time. they have not budgeted for four years. and businesses know that you can't operate an enterprise, let alone the federal government, without budgeting. >> let me have you respond to this other argument about entitlements, about the role of government. and the president really launched it as part of his inaugural address when he said this. >> we recognize that no matter how responsibly we live our lives, any one of us, at any time, may face a job loss or a sudden illness or a home swept away in a terrible storm. the commitments we make to each other through medicare and medicaid and social security, these things do not sap our nation. they strengthen us. they do not make us a nation of takers. they free us to take the risk that make this country great. >> now that line of attack, didn't mention you by name, but certainly mentions you in substance, went back to a number of comments that you made about the makers versus takers. here's one back in september of 2011. >> right now, according to the tax foundation, between 60% and 70% of americans get more benefits from the federal government than they pay to the government. so we have a society of makers versus takers. >> if you keep the context going, my point in making that statistic is it's not as these statistics lead you to believe. we don't want a dependency culture. we want a safety net to get people on their feet. americans want the american dream. the point i make citing that statistic is it's not as it seems. people want the american dream. they want lives of opportunity. they want to reach their potential. and so our concern in this country is with the idea that more and more able-bodied people are becoming dependent upon the government than upon themselves for their livelihoods. we want to make sure we don't continue that trend. and when you take a look at those statistics, it's not as bad as those statistics say. people want lives of upper mobility. people want to chart their own course. they want to reach their potential. and our policies should be geared toward doing that. so no one is suggesting that medicare and social security makes you a taker. these are people like my mom, who worked hard, paid her taxes, and now is collecting the benefit that she paid for. no one is suggesting that people like my mom is a taker. >> but you're citing figures that of course include entitlement reforms like social security. >> when these statistics get cited, it leads you to think that america is gone, that we're becoming too much of a dependent culture. my point has always been, that's not the whole picture. >> here is the criticism against you. and it was written about in the new york magazine blog this week, which goes to whether you want to expand the base of the party. here's what he writes. obama is arguing that misfortune can strike americans in all forms. a sdabt, a storm, illness, or merely outliving our savings. ryan's budget imposes savage cuts to food stamps, children's health insurance, and other mitigations of suffering for the least fortunate. and ryan also voted against relief for victims of hurricane sandy. by ryan's definition, if the government is rebuilding your destroyed home, you're a taker too. >> look, this is a straw man argument. the president said earlier that we had suspicions about medicare and taking care of the elderly and feeding poor children. when he sets up these straw men, to affix views to add ver sears that they don't have, to win the argument by default, it's not an honest debate. we want to have a safety net. a safety net that's there for the vulnerable, poor, for people who cannot help themselves. but we don't want to have a culture in this country that encouraging more dependency that saps and drains people of their ability to make the most of their lives. >> which part of the culture today is doing that? is part of this culture that you even benefited from after your father died. >> absolutely. >> so which part of the safety net culture is sapping america's opportunity right now? >> this is the point we keep making with benefits like food stamps, for example. the benefits that he talks about, the changes we made, all we're saying is you actually have to be eligible for the program to receive it. we need to target it so that people that actually need them. if our reforms on food stamps went through, they would have grown by 260% over the last decade instead of 270%. when you call such reforms savage, that i think does a disservice to the quality of the debate we need to have. what we're trying to achieve is a system where you have that safety net to help people who cannot help themselves, but you have an opportunity of society, education reform, economic growth, so that people can get on their feet and make the most of their lives and reach their potential. and that's what we're worried about losing in this country. >> one more on the budget. then a couple of other things. do you think there's a failure to get to know each other in washington, really get to know each other? you haven't had much contact with the president over the last couple of years. somebody pointed out to me something i thought was smart, which was solving the problem on the budget is not complicated. winning politically and solving the problem, that's hard. and that's what both sides seem to be locked into trying to do. >> well, i don't think that the president thinks we actually have a fiscal crisis. he's been reportedly saying to our leaders that we don't have a spending problem. we have a health care problem. that leads me to conclude he just thinks we ought to have more government-run health care and rationing. i don't think that's going to work. so there are a lot of democrats that are good friends of mine who agree with us on how to do medicare reform. on the need to do entitlement reform, tax reform with lower rates for faster economic growth. the problem is the leaders of that party don't seem to want to come to agreement with this. so my concern is the president may be more focused on political ends, you know, in 2014, versus actually moving to the middle. when you saw his speech, say, at the inauguration, it leads us to conclude that he's not looking to moderate. he's not looking to move to the middle. he is looking to go further to the left, and he wants to fight us every step of the way politically. and i don't think that's good for anybody in this country. >> it's reminiscent, isn't it, of a lot of republican leaders after his first inauguration getting together and trying to make him a one-term president? >> no. i see it as we have big problems we need to fix. we want to be a part of that solution. whether people like it or not or intend it or not, we more or less had the status quo election. we have a divided government. we have to make it work. when we see our country living far beyond its means, when we see our nation destroying our children's future by saddling them with a debt they can't handle, we have to do something about that. when we see families struggling in this economy, we have to do things to grow this economy. and the things that are coming out of washington right now don't do that. and that's why we're offering solutions. that's why we were showing with our budget here's how to grow the economy. here's how you save your kids from a debt-laden future. here's how you save medicare. this is the kind of debate, the honest debate, that we need to have versus impugning people's motives. >> what did you learn from your run for the vice presidency and being mitt romney's running mate? what did you take away as a republican as you look to the future? >> it was a great experience. i feel that i benefited tremendously from that. my family got to see a lot of the country. we got to see countless people who just feel so passionate about their country. the other thing i learn was mitt romney would have been one heck of a great president. he is a very good man. the big regret i have is we didn't win the election and weren't able to put the reforms we think are right for the country in place. and now we're going to have to use this tool of divided government to try and make it work. >> what do you think the party should learn from the loss? >> obviously, we have to expand our appeal. we have to expand our appeal to more people and show how we'll take the country's founding principles and apply them to the problem was the day, solutions to fix our problems. we have to show our ideas are better at fighting poverty, better at solving health care, how our ideas are better at solving problems that people experience in their daily lives. and that's a challenge we have to rise to. and i think we're up for it. >> on a couple of issues in specific areas, immigration is one, what's it going to take to get conservatives to rally around an idea that illegal immigrants who are here now can stay without having to first leave, which is something you propose, and get a pathway to citizenship? do you think that conservatives can rally around that idea and ultimately get reform passed? >> yeah. i think there's a balance between respecting the rule of law and adhering to the reality of the day. and i think marco rubio probably touched on it. i support and agree with the principles he laid out as far as earned legalization. making sure people don't cut in line but fixing the problem. we did reform in '86 and again in '96. it's a system that's broken that needs fixing. and many of us who have been involved in this issue over the years. immigration is a good thing. that's what america is. it's a melting pot. we think this is good. we need to make sure it works. i think there are republicans and democrats, many of us are talking to each other, that can come together with a good solution to make sure that this problem is fixed. once and for all. and i think those rubio principles do a really good job of adhering to the founding principles, respecting the rule of law, and respecting those who came here for a better life. >> and do you see that getting done this year? >> i do. that's one of the areas where i feel that i think the president has a big speech coming up. the question that many of us are asking, republicans and democrats, is he looking to play politics or does he want to solve the problem? we don't know the answer to that yet. but i do know there are a lot of democrats in congress who once and for all want to fix this mess, broken immigration system, and many of us agree with that. hopefully we can actually get this done. >> on gun control legislation, are there any new regulations that you could support? >> well, i think the question of whether or not a criminal is getting a gun is a question we need to look at. that's what the background check issue is all about. and i think we need to look into making sure there aren't big loopholes where a person can illegally purchase a firearm. but i elalso think we need to lk beyond recycling failed policies of the past. you and i are the same age, same age kids, same number of kids. it's our worst nightmare something like this happening. let's go beyond the debate and go deeper. what's our policy on mental illness? what's going on in our culture that produces this kind of thing? we need to have that kind of discussion and debate, and i hope we don't just skip past that and bring out political ideas that recycle failed policies of the past. >> you seem to see a lot of division here. you think the president in some ways is trying to finish off the republican party. so i don't hear you as saying anything about more comprehensive reforms in the way you think is necessary and you blame the president for that and his mindset. >> i decided to not comment between the election and the inauguration because i wanted to see what kind of president we were looking at here, what kind of path and trajectory he was putting his administration on. and all of the statements and all of the comments lead me to believe that he's thinking more of a political conquest than political compromise. and that's my concern. and this is why we're going to have to have a big debate this spring on how to balance the budget. about how to save us from a debt crisis. about how to grow the economy. and i think there are issues, like immigration reform, where there are democrats and republicans who want to come together to fix the problem. the question is will the president frustrate that or facilitate that. and i don't know the answer to that question. >> it was interesting on the day of the inauguration, brian williams and others and i were talking, and we noticed some video during the luncheon, and one of the things that caught our eye was a great moment here. you have your back to us. but there you are with secretary clinton and president clinton. and that's just one of those moments where you say, gosh, what were they talking about? any advice there? >> talking about personal health. we both lost our dads when we were young, and we were talking. i got concussions when i was young, and hillary was telling me about hers. we were just kind of chumming it up. look, if we had a clinton presidency, if we had erskine bowles, i think we would have fixed this fiscal mess by now. that's not the kind of presidency we're dealing with right now. >> and you don't blame conservatives, particularly in the house, for thwarting that effort? >> both parties -- forget about just the recent past. both parties got us in the mess we are in, this fiscal crisis. republicans and democrats. and it will take both parties to solve this problem. that's the kind of leadership we need today. >> how do you think about 2016 and a presidential run? >> i don't. >> you're not thinking about it now? >> i think it's just premature. i've got an important job to do. i represent wisconsin. i'm chairman of the budget committee at the time we have a fiscal crisis. i think i can do my job by focusing on that right now rather than focusing on distant things. >> but you'll take a serious look at it? >> i'll decide later about that. right now i'm focused on this. >> chairman, thank you very much as always. appreciate it. >> thank you. >>> coming up here, what did we learn from president obama's inaugural address? plus, the secretary of state hillary clinton exits the stage, and presidevice president biden profile expands. joining me former senator and now incoming president of the heritage foundation, former senator jim demint income. president of the naacp jim jealous. nbc's chief foreign affairs correspondent andrea mitchell. plus, nbc news special correspondent ted koppel. >> "meet the pre we know why we're here. ♪ to connect our forces to what they need, when they need it. ♪ to help troops see danger, before it sees them. ♪ to answer the call of the brave and bring them safely home. [ female announcer ] around the globe, the people of boeing are working together, to support and protect all who serve. that's why we're here. ♪ >>> the president's nominee to run the state department, senator john kerry, faced questions before the senate foreign relations committee this week. during his opening remarks, he was interrupted by an anti-war protester, which triggered this personal reply. >> when i first came to washington to testify, i obviously was testifying as part of a group of people who came here to have their voices heard. and that is above all what this place is about. >> nearly 42 years ago, it was kerry who aimed to have his voice heard when he first appeared on capitol hill not as a politician but as a protester. the year, 1971. he was part of an anti-war group testifying before that very committee. but it was days before on this program where kerry gave the country its first look at a future leader. and it's this morning's "meet the press" moment. >> we are down here to demand that those who call themselves the most committed of all in this country, namely the senators and congressmen, who have been talking peace for the past few years, that these men exercise their responsibility granted them by the constitution of this country to end this war. >> as kerry prepares for his new assignment, he faces some critical challenges as the president's foreign policy opens critical challenges as the presi[ male announcer ]icy opens i've seen incredible things. otherworldly things. but there are some things i've never seen before. this ge jet engine can understand 5,000 data samples per second. which is good for business. because planes use less fuel, spend less time on the ground and more time in the air. suddenly, faraway places don't seem so...far away. ♪ there's natural gas under my town. it's a game changer. ♪ it means cleaner, cheaper american-made energy. but we've got to be careful how we get it. design the wells to be safe. thousands of jobs. use the most advanced technology to protect our water. billions in the economy. at chevron, if we can't do it right, we won't do it at all. we've got to think long term. we've got to think long term. ♪ we've got to think long term. we've got to think long term. (announcer) scottrade knows our and invest their own way. with scottrade's smart text, i can quickly understand my charts, and spend more time trading. their quick trade bar lets my account follow me online so i can react in real-time. plus, my local scottrade office is there to help. because they know i don't trade like everybody. i trade like me. i'm with scottrade. (announcer) scottrade. voted "best investment services company." a talking car. but i'll tell you what impresses me. a talking train. this ge locomotive can tell you exactly where it is, what it's carrying, while using less fuel. delivering whatever the world needs, when it needs it. ♪ after all, what's the point of talking if you don't have something important to say? ♪ >>> we're black back /* back with our roundtable. president and ceo of naacp ben jealous. incoming president of the heritage foundation, former senator jim demint. nbc news special correspondent for rock center ted koppel. nbc's own ted koppel. and associate editor for "the washington post," bob woodward. and nbc's chief foreign affairs correspondent andrea mitchell. welcome to all of you. a lot to get to. and as we react to paul ryan this morning, i want to show some of the headlines from the president's inaugural address. obama offers a liberal vision. we must act. charles kranthammer wrote this in "the washington post" and it caught my attention on friday and i want to put on the screen. his mission is to redeem and resurrect a 50-year pre-reagan liberal ascendency. accordi accordingly, his address is his historical marker, the reagan of the left. if he succeeds in the next four years, he would have earned the title. and i so that, bob, because of what paul ryan said that i thought was so notable, is that he believes this president is more interested in political conquest than political compromise. that is the backdrop for a second term. >> and ryan is an important figure in this in many ways. and i think you agree. he's quite likely the future of the republican party. but if you go back three years ago, president obama himself publicly said that the ryan proposal on medicare was serious and legitimate. the president is playing -- and not the republicans aren't. they play a lot of politics. but the president is playing politics too. when i talked to the president six months ago about medicare, he said the spending trajectory is untenable. and so he knows there needs to be a fix in this area. and what's the shame in all of this is that they can't kind of sit down and work it out, because, you know, if you were the negotiator up at camp david, you'd be able to do it. >> well, one of the problems is they're not at camp david. they are not sitting down together. but the state of the union i think should not be viewed as -- rather the inaugural address should not be viewed as a state of the union speech. this is not the place where he was laying it out. i'm told by white house officials that he put on the table for medicare is still on the table. he wants to negotiate it. and i think paul ryan will be leading the republican side on where they go on this. there are going to be serious negotiations. they have to get down to it. i think where the liberal or progressive mission was from the inaugural speech was on human rights, on dr. king's legacy, on gay rights. that was profoundly moving and important. that's where he sees his legacy. >> but that's not going to drive legislation as much. ted koppel, the big issues of the day are the ones we've been fighting for the last several years. how much taxes, how much in spending cuts, and this role of government. >> david, i think the president recognizes the obvious, that is he's got eight to 12 months to do things, and the time for being coy is long over. he laid it out. and he laid it out without any ambiguity. i think he's going to push. he's going to push hard. and push immediately. >> jim demint, former senator, where do you see your party pushing? where should they push? how do they balance conservative principles with a real desire on the part of the public to see compromise and achievement? >> paul ryan was talking about one of the most important moral issues of our time. the fact that we are stealing from our children and putting so much debt on them that their lives, their opportunities, are going to be greatly diminished. and what he said about balancing our budget or putting our country on at least a path to balance our budget in 10 years is a complete contrast with what president obama is talking about. before we get into all the political labels and the specifics, it's clear the president plans to keep spending and borrowing and putting more debt on our children. so america has a perfect contrast between the directions that they want to go. we know -- >> but we just had an election, senator with two different directions, and america chose. that's what paul ryan said last year. the country will choose what happens in 2013. and they did. so are we past the point of two different visions in choosing? >> i don't think the country has chosen that. in fact, we see almost in the majority of states now where a conservative, bold visionary governors are implementing the ideas that work. and that's what conservatism really is. whether it's cutting taxes or freedom in the workplace or education choice, what want to do is what we need to do for the american people is show them the successes and which ideas work. we can show where president obama's ideas go. we can look in history, at countries that failed. at europe today. we can look at his home state of illinois. the tax and spend and big government approach has always failed. so our job as conservatives is to make sure americans know that. and we need to show it with real people and real faces. >> but a lot of this we have to remind ourselves is about economic growth. what makes the economy grow, what gets people back to work, and what role does washington play in that? >> we know how to get out of tough times. we got out of the great depression by investing in what we wanted to be as a country, by investing in jobs rather than focusing on our fears. you know, i would push back and say that the big issues of this day also include marriage equality. they include comprehensive immigration reform. and right now when you look at joblessness in this country, you know, the country is back to pretty much where it was when this president started. white people in this country are doing a bit better. black folks are doing a full point worse. so with this president having said to us we need to invest in strategies to lift all boats, now that some boats are clearly more stuck, the question is will congress join him in getting those boats unstuck too. >> well, but the question, ted koppel, as well is where the president tries to seek a way forward. he doesn't think much of republicans in terms of their approach or being able to deal with them. but he can also confuse the opposition a little bit if he would take the reins and say, look, we have though o do big sg cuts and here's why. it's helpful for the solvency of the country, even if he has to push back against some democrats. >> look, david, i'm going to defer to some of the others here who spend more time covering domestic policy. i think this president is going to end up facing some of the biggest foreign policy crises that we have had in many years. and i know you want to get to that later. so let me hold my piece there. >> well, look, this can be worked out if you look at the plans, and they seem very abstract when paul ryan and president obama talk about them. they are just saying, let's fix a little bit on the entitlement front, and they're not saying let's start tomorrow cutting. they're saying let's start in five years or 10 years. it is all doable and fixable. and then this gets to the engine of the economy. and if you fix that, if you stabilize the debt in some reasonable way, we're going to have growth. the unemployment rate should come down. and president obama is exactly right. focusing on the people at the lower end here. you fix and help the people at the lower end by getting the economy going again. you're exactly right. and the psychologically for the democrats and republicans, it's so important that there be some consensus. you get paul ryan here with his charts, and it looks like the world is going to end at some point. and you need to get everyone onboard to the idea, no, the world is not going to end. >> andrea, i was on capitol hill this weekend. you get a sense that a lot of the gun legislation is not going to be successful. immigration reform is moving at pace. they are having very constructive conversations, republicans and democrats together. the entitlement piece is going to be hard, whether the president wants to go very far on medicare. he has liberals saying don't do it, don't raise the retirement age. so how do these pieces come together here in the next three, four, five months? >> that is exactly the question. when he even suggested raising that retirement age from 65 to 67, decades from now actually, and not affecting current retirees, the whole liberal base exploded against him. the aarp went to war against him. so he has to decide whether to take that. even the budget negotiators iss, the gang of six, said that was a nonstarter. on immigration, you see these negotiations with lindsey graham and mccain and rubio on the republican side. and durbin and schumer and others on the democratic side. they are really making progress. the president is giving a speech on tuesday with outlines. the question now is, is he going to send legislation up? that is still to be determined. and he just met with the hispanic caucus and with the senators in the last couple of days. the other thing is guns. and despite all of the hints from the white house that they are not backing off of the assault weapon ban, most people i have been talking to in recent days, inside the white house and out, agree that that is really going to be the biggest lift. but if they can get the magazines and the background checks and something on mental health, they think there is something that can be done there. >> senator demint, part of the calculation for republicans is whe where do they push, where do they fight. this is part of the self-examination of the party. bobby jindal spoke out, was outspoken on thursday, talking to republicans. here's part of what he said. >> we've got to stop being the stupid party. i'm serious. it's time for a new republican party that talks like adults. it's time for us to articulate our plans and vision for america in real terms. it's no secret we had a number of republicans that damaged the brand this year with offensive and bizarre comments. we've had enough of that. >> he is arguing about coloraso getting in the way. colin powell talking about the republican party. how do you view that? >> i talked to governor jindal yesterday. we are on the same page. he knows that spending more than we're bringing in is a moral argument that we need to connect with the american people. and not just in numbers. but we need to help people see that what we're doing here in washington, the politicians are the real takers because they are taking the future away. every paycheck is going to be worth less. and the future of our children with the debt on their head means that the opportunities that they could have are going to be diminished. >> that's not quite what he was speaking of there. what he's talking about is how the brand positions itself. >> one of the reasons i left congress is because i don't believe that politicians are going to solve our problems unless the american people force them to. they're going to keep spending and borrowing in washington. they're going to keep implementing policies, as ben just said, that hurt minorities. they are worse off. and we can go to detroit and philadelphia and chicago where these liberal progressive policies have been in place for decades, and you see latinos and african-americans in failing schools, with high unemployment. what we're going to do, and i know what governor jindal is going to do along with a lot of other governors, is show the success stories where the right ideas are implemented. and we're going to show the failures in detroit and philadelphia and l.a. >> ben, comment before we go to break. >> you know, there are places where we can clearly work together. criminal justice reform is one of them. but the real question for the gop is whether they are willing to give up on the gasoline that has been the old dixiecrat rhetoric for the past 40 years. and when he talked about those bizarre and insulting comments, that's what he's talking about. playing to the cheap seats again and again. they need to stop. they need to say, look, we have an old brand, the grand old party, the party of lincoln, the party of people who united this country again and again. let's be that. and let's stop trying to be these dixiecrats. it just doesn't work for anybody. >> senator, do you regret some of the comments about abortion in this last cycle, about rape, about what colin powell thought were failed racist comments from the party? >> well, david, the fact that we are losing over 3,000 unborn children a day is an important issue. but republicans or conservatives should not engage in a debate about exceptions for abortions when the other side will not even agree that we have real people, real human beings. we need to fight the battle where it should be fought. life is important. we know from all of the new technology and improved sonograms that we do have a baby. and it's important that we fight for that. but instead of just offering my opinion on some hypothetical debate about exceptions for abortions, we need to move it back and particularly work with the states that are fighting for just the personhood of the child. if we can start there, i think america will move with us. >> all right. a little different about the question than rhetoric and how to reach voters. but i want to come back and talk about foreign policy. hillary clinton in the hot seat this week talking about benghazi. and the threat that is ahead that she warned about, that as and the threat that is ahead all stations come over toat as mission a for a final go. no go call. this is for real this time. we are on step seven point two one two. we have entered our two minute hold. cabin venting has been inhibited. copy that. sys two, verify and lock. command is locked. flight computer state has entered auto idyll. three, two, one. the falcon 9 has launched. preparing for nose cone separation. standing by for capture. the most innovative software on the planet... dragon is captured. is connecting today's leading companies to places beyond it. siemens. answers. executor of efficiency. you can spot an amateur from a mile away... while going shoeless and metal-free in seconds. and you...rent from national. because only national lets you choose any car in the aisle...and go. you can even take a full-size or above, and still pay the mid-size price. now this...will work. [ male announcer ] just like you, business pro. just like you. go national. go like a pro. >>> with all due respect, the fact is we had four dead americans. was it because of a protest or guys out for a walk one night who decided to go kill some americans? what difference at this point does it make? it is our job to figure out what happened, and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again, senator. >> a combative section of the hearing on benghazi on capitol hill this week. we're back with more of the roundtable. ted koppel, wider than just the benghazi investigation and the questions are about a region that's in ferment, in revolution in certain parts, where there are a lot of threats facing the united states. and it's not getting a lot of attention thus far from the administration. certainly from the president's inaugural address. and there are real fears in the region that iran particularly is going to be on the edge of causing problems for the u.s. >> i think, david, as i suggested before, that we're entering one of the most dangerous periods this country has ever known. a, it's not over in afghanistan. b, to the degree that al qaeda has moved over into pakistan, that's a country that has over 100 nuclear weapons. syria, which is an ongoing problem. the suggestion constantly seems to be that we need to come in on the side of the rebels. there are at least 1,000 al qaeda members in syria today fighting on the side of the rebels. if the chemical weapons fall into their hands, big problems. you mentioned iran. remember now, and it may even have been on this program, i think that netanyahu suggested that come spring, come early summer, if the iranians still have not pulled back from building a nuclear weapon, the israelis may attack. the iranians would respond against the united states. and they have the capacity to do it with cyber war. >> i think it's even bigger and more troubling than that. it isn't just the middle east and that region. look at north korea. announcing that they are going to target the united states. they have nuclear weapons, unlike iran at this point. you look at what happened in algeria and mali. the egypt problem is not solved. i actually had one of the experts tell me recently that the next book i ought to do is this whole sweep of foreign policy, and the working title of the book would be "meltdown." >> andrea, i want you to respond to something. hillary clinton when she was not talking about benghazi issued a warning for her successor, which i gather she also wanted to make sure was heard inside the white house, when she talked about the region. in this case, north africa, the al qaeda presence bigger than benghazi. this is what she said. >> let me underscore the importance of the united states continuing to lead in the middle east, in north africa, and around the world. when america is absent, especially from unstable environments, there are consequences. extremism takes root. our interests suffer. our security at home is threatened. >> i think she is trying to warn the administration and the world that we cannot retreat from this engagement here. and right now, overnight, we've seen that the u.s. is doing refueling of french fighters in mali, which is very troublesome to some. it is a much more aggressive posture. but the uk has taken all of their nationals out of somalia overnight. this area of north africa as bob and ted were just saying is the most dangerous perhaps in the world, aside from pakistan and afghanistan which are nuclear armed against each other. and pakistan and india nuclear armed against each other and what's happening in afghanistan as we retreat and the effect on that and north korea. so they have to really not just look at immigration and guns and the budget as the next challenges here. >> have we figured out, senator, what the balance is between invasions, nation building, a huge commitment on the part of the united states in this part of the world, and turning our eye away from governments that could be illegitimate or failed states that invite either, you know, terrorists or authoritarian regimes to take root? >> well, there's not a lot of patience for the requirements of understanding here in washington. what secretary clinton said reflected a deep problem, not just in foreign policy but domestic policy, when she said what difference does it make? it's the same type of thing we see on all policies. it's an unwillingness to really bore down and understand the root causes of failures and successes. and that's why i think we see our foreign policy going in a lot of directions. it doesn't seem to be coherent. it sends signals of weakness. we don't understand what north korea really is doing right now. it is not just to provoke us, but it's a product demonstration for iran and other countries that want to see if these things work. we know north korea wants to sell them. so i think there is a perception of american weakness. but our problem here is the failure to really understand what is motivating these other countries and how we can affect -- >> but the conversation hasn't really been about that. at least not that we as the voters see. what we see is people in washington kind of picking on each other, focusing on personalities, who know what when. voters really want to know what's happening out there and what are you going to do. >> ted, that's my point. do we have a real policy approach that is somewhere in between a projection of american power and just leaving the region? >> the answer is yes. i don't think, ben, that it means that we necessarily have a strategy, but we have new tactics. we have moved away from the big unit operations, divisions, tanks, and are moving more in the direction of special operations, cia, drones, civilian contractors, cyber warfare. this is what you're going to see happening. but we're also playing whack-a-mole with al qaeda. and i think one of the greatest mistakes that the president has made is in leaving america with a sense that somehow al qaeda has been dealt with, the war in afghanistan is over, the war in iraq is over. the fact of the matter is we've got major problems, and al qaeda is one of them. >> i want to get to a political note. on "60 minutes" tonight, an interview with the president and hillary clinton. >> the main thing is i just wanted to have a chance to publicly say thank you, because i think hillary will go down as one of the finest secretaries of state we've had. it has been a great collaboration over the last four years. i'm going to miss her. a few years ago, it would have been seen as improbable because we had that very long, hard primary campaign. look, in politics and in democracy, sometimes you win elections, sometimes you lose elections. and i worked very hard, but i lost. and then president obama asked me to be secretary of state. and i said yes. and why did he ask me and why did i say yes? because we both love our country. >> andrea, is he passing the baton? >> you can imagine the joe biden camp and what they said to that. unprecedented in an interview that president obama has never done an interview with anyone other than his wife, and here he is doing it with the secretary of state. i have talked to a lot of democrats who say that if she decides, and she hasn't decided, but if she decides and she is completely positioned to run, she clears the field. there's no one else. not comeau, not joe biden, no one can take her on. because after eight years of president obama, who could come in and as a woman and as a non-obama person originally, be enough of an outsider to challenge a republican. >> this is a real powerful historic mandate. >> yeah. >> but don't wipe joe biden off the slate. he has been a vital part of the obama administration on foreign affairs and on domestic affairs. he's the one who goes and makes the secret deals with mcconnell. >> that's right. >> he is the go-to -- >> bob, i'm saying what democratic leaders are saying. i'm just quoting what they say, that she has -- >> plenty of time for 2016. it's over [ male announcer ] you've climbed a few mountains during your time. and having an investment expert like northern trust by your side makes all the difference. we add precision to your portfolio construction by directly matching your assets and your risk preferences against your own unique life goals. we call it goals driven investing. after all, you don't climb a mountain just to sit at the top. you look around for other mountains to climb. ♪ expertise matters. find it at northern trust. ♪ we've decided to we're all having such a great year in the gulf, put aside our rivalry. 'cause all our states are great. and now is when the gulf gets even better. the beaches and waters couldn't be more beautiful. take a boat ride or just lay in the sun. enjoy the wildlife and natural beauty. and don't forget our amazing seafood. so come to the gulf, you'll have a great time. especially in alabama. you mean mississippi. that's florida. say louisiana or there's no dessert. brought to you by bp and all of us who call the gulf home. ♪ [ multiple sounds making melodic tune ] ♪ [ male announcer ] at northrop grumman, every innovation, every solution, comes together for a single purpose -- to make the world a safer place. that's the value of performance. northrop grumman. >>> thanks to our roundtable this morning. before we go, quick programming note. you can watch this week's press pass conversation with vice president and director for foreign policy at the brookings institute, martin indyk, on some of the big bets president obama is making during his second term in foreign policy. that's on meetthepress@msnbc.com. [ male announcer ] wouldn't it be cool if we took the already great sentra apart and completely reimagined it with best-in-class combined mpg and more interior room than corolla and civic and a technology suite with bluetooth, navigation, and other handy stuff? yeah, that would be cool. introducing the all-new nissan sentra. it's our most innovative sentra ever. nissan. innovation that excites. now get a $169 per month lease on a new nissan sentra, plus $500 bonus cash. ♪ aww man. [ male announcer ] returns are easy with free pickup from the u.s. postal service. we'll even drop off boxes if you need them. visit usps.com pay, print, and have it picked up for free. any time of year. ♪ nice sweater. thank you. ♪ a talking car. but i'll tell you what impresses me. a talking train. this ge locomotive can tell you exactly where it is, what it's carrying, while using less fuel. delivering whatever the world needs, when it needs it. ♪ after all, what's the point of talking if you don't have something important to say? ♪ properly inflated tires can if you don't have something important to say? increase fuel efficiency by three percent. that's about 8 cents a gallon, and that can really add up over the next few years. see, going green can save you green the more you know. . >>> he's back. guess who is knocking at the door? >> don't touch him. do not touch him. >> is there anything else you wanted to say? >> tonight, chris hansen and his hidden cameras investigate the crazy world of the on-line classifieds. a website that offers anything you want, legal
WHUT
Jan 28, 2013 8:30am EST
>> right now, the european union is in distress. what would a failed euro mean for the e.u. or for its largest trading partner, the u.s.? >> the '08/'09 financial panic/crash/great recession put tremendous economic financial pressure on the entire global economy, including europe. >> in the same way in which the collapse of lehman implied global shocks, a dissolve in the situation of the eurozone is going to impact the united states. >> while everyone is telling the germans, "bail these guys out now," the germans are saying, "if we're gonna bail them out, we wanna fix the political crisis." >> at the end of the day, europe and the eurozone face an existential question: can we become the united states of europe? >> in a democracy, agreement is not essential, but participation is. >> never before in our history have we been so interconnected with the rest of the world. >> foreign policy is actually not foreign. >> america has faced great hardship before and each time we have risen to the challenge. >> the ultimate test is to move our society from where it is to where it has never been. >> join us as we explore today's most critical global issues. join us for great decisions. >> great decisions is produced by the foreign policy association, inspiring americans to learn more about the world. sponsorship of great decisions is provided by credit suisse, eni, the hurford foundation, and pricewaterhousecoopers llp. >> coming up next, imperfect union: the eurozone in crisis. (instrumental music) >> why does the european union exist at all? the answer is simple, strength in numbers. >> an historic meeting takes place in rome's city hall. long a dream, the common european market takes its first step forward as representatives... >> i think there was a real desire in the aftermath of the devastation of world war ii to get the european continent back on its feet. realizing that pulling together economically might play to their benefit longer term, an economic union, if you will. >> the theory was that if you got them linked together economically, then they would have enough in common and enough common interests that they wouldn't want to go to war anymore. >> in 1957, that simple concept inspired the formation of a trading block called, the european economic community. >> the idea was that if you brought these countries together using a currency union and the trading links, that eventually their economic cycles would synchronize. >> the idea worked and other european nations wanted in. so in 1993, they formed the european union. two years later, they introduced a common currency known as the "euro" with 17 of the 27 member states eventually adopting the new denomination. >> in the dutch city of maastricht, a treaty was signed that had huge significance for the future of europe. >> they share a currency and they share a central bank, the european central bank in frankfurt that makes the monetary policy for the whole euro area. >> unification made trade among member nations a breeze. as a result, the e.u. became the world's second-largest economy and america's top trading partner. >> real engines to growth in the european union have to do with trade and opening up trade, and that's what the e.u. has done for the past 50 years. >> europe is the biggest economy in the world. the trading relationship between united states and europe is the biggest in the world. >> but even as the e.u. succeeded in bringing economic success to member nations, critics warned of crucial flaws in its complex structure. >> they threw together a whole lot of economies that are very different from each other, gave them a single interest rate policy, but didn't put in place any of the political institutions that would be necessary to help countries that feel the pain of an interest rate policy that's not appropriate to their own economic situation. >> in the united states, you have very different levels of productivity between new york and alabama, but you're within one system of governance. you have not only one currency, but you have one national budget and one fiscal deficit. in europe that was never true. >> in the states, you know that you have your local government, you have your state government, and you have your federal government. you pretty much know the architecture of who governs, who legislates, and who runs the show. europe, it's a little more complicated. you start with the national governments and they have their own constituencies, their own electorates to represent. now add to that a layer of eurozone institutions, so organizations, institutions that were built to deal with europe and the eurozone. one of them is the european commission, which is based in brussels and they are essentially the administrators and the bureaucrats of the european project. but also crucially, in frankfurt, the european central bank, which is the central bank for all 17 eurozone countries and the closest thing that the euro has to a fed, only it doesn't perceive itself as powerful as the fed. >> many people knew there would be a crisis all along at some point, because it was only when you had the crisis that you have the political impetus to actually put in place the political institutions that a single currency needs. (instrumental music) >> in 2009, the e.u. began to buckle under the pressure of the international credit crisis. >> the '08/'09 financial panic/crash/great recession put tremendous economic financial pressure on the entire global economy, including europe. europe suffered a worse economic downturn than the united states, a loss of gdp, employment. unemployment soared into the double digits. >> we started calling what's happening now the eurozone debt crisis, essentially in may, 2010, which is when greece received its first bailout funded by the international monetary fund and eurozone countries. and since then, the crisis has spread throughout the eurozone to several other countries: ireland, then portugal, now spain and cyprus, and reaching italy, uh, and has mutated from a strictly sovereign-debt government crisis to a banking crisis and sort of sectoral crisis. >> the origins of the european debt crisis are multiple. the approximate cause was the fact that many countries recently have had a large increase in budget deficits and there's lots of public debt to levels that are unsustainable. in some countries this was due to bad fiscal behavior, too much spending, too little taxes like in greece, but in other parts of the eurozone, like spain or ireland, the problem was that there was a bubble in real estate and housing. when the bubble burst, the countries went into a recession. when there is a recession your deficit increase, then you have to bail out banks, financial institutions, and the private losses get socialized. it happened in the u.s. and then you have a surge of public debt. >> these bubbles, either in government spending or in the banks or in the property sector, were essentially fueled by what tends to always drive crises in human history, which is hubris and excess. >> the crisis laid bare the fiscal health of e.u. member states and germany was one of the few nations who had been acting responsibly. >> they had a series of reforms in germany that held down wages very substantially relative to productivity and that made german goods cheaper, more competitive on the world markets. they were not doing that in greece and ireland and in portugal, and even in france and italy. >> 10 years ago, 12 years ago, the basket-case country of europe was germany. they went through reforms, they got back on their feet, their export machine was revved up and here they are top of the heap. >> the consequence of that is that germany is now this hyper-competitive economy with its manufacturing sector being helped enormously by what, from a german perspective, is an under-valued euro. of course, that same currency from a greek perspective is an over-valued euro and that's a huge problem. >> over-valued since greece had accumulated a mountain of debt. in 2009 alone, greece borrowed $300 billion euros, more than its entire gdp. >> the biggest borrowers would be greece, italy, spain, ireland, portugal. these are the most troubled, what we call periphery european countries; they're the most indebted. greece is the weak link, but it's an incredibly small economy. you could fit it in, in rhode island, you know? so, and already two-thirds of their debt is on european's balance sheet. >> greece, which has probably the economy that everyone likes to demonize. germans in particular like to think about greece being full of people who basically work about an hour a week, and get a huge pay rise from the government every time they ask for one, and they are terribly union-dominated in a very bad way, and very corrupt, and so forth. >> before the crisis, nations like greece took advantage of cheap rates afforded them by their status as an e.u. member, but they eventually borrowed more than they could pay back. >> you not only had these countries that were continuing to spend well beyond their capacity to pay back, and you had banks that were prepared to lend to them despite the fact that they couldn't pay back. what does that sound like? it sounds like all those american banks that were providing mortgages to people that clearly never had the capacity to buy that house or pay back those loans. >> before 2010, markets just assumed that eurozone countries were pretty much similar in terms of risk. so you saw greece almost borrowing as cheaply, not as cheaply, but almost as cheaply as germany, which is the strongest and biggest european economy. after 2010, the markets started realizing that this was not at all the case and just started charging a lot more to lend to many eurozone countries. that in turn led to countries not being able to refinance their debt. >> in the case of the eurozone, you already have five or six countries, greece, ireland, portugal, now italy and spain that either have lost market access and they need an international bailout, or like italy and spain, are on the verge of needing such a bailout. >> that's when you start to get this phrase thrown around the pigs, uh, economy, the pigs economies, portugal, ireland, italy, greece, and spain. more and more there was this debate about, you know, can those governments avoid default? what would be the implications of a eurozone government defaulting for the other members of the eurozone, and would it be necessary for the rich eurozone countries like germany and france to bail out the poor, deeply indebted ones like greece, ireland, spain and italy? >> funded largely by germany, the e.u. and the i.m.f. moved quickly to dole out 110 billion euros in cheap loans to keep greece's economy afloat. soon after came similar bailouts for portugal, ireland and spain. >> the european central bank has started to help. germany and other members of the core have provided through new institutions bailout money to the country distressed. in some cases, like greece, ireland, and portugal, the help has come not only within europe, but also from the international community, the international monetary fund. >> these countries, greece and portugal and spain and italy and even ireland, uh, which for very different reasons no longer were able to manage their national economies without some form of european intervention. and that's where you have a problem, because unless you get the intervention, unless you get the bailout, you can't fix the problem. >> but the bailouts came with a heavy price. german chancellor angela merkel demanded the recipient nations adopt more fiscally responsible policies. >> it has to be, i think, internal to germany feeling that it has to do this in order to keep the european dream alive. >> in europe, they're actually trying not to waste the crisis, because frankly, the stakes are higher. there's much more urgency, there's less time. and so as a consequence, while everyone is telling the germans, "bail these guys out now," the germans are saying, "if we're gonna bail them out, we want to fix the political crisis." and because a lot of the leaders, the political leaders in these peripheral states don't want to do that because it's painful, this crisis gets worse. >> the endgame here is a more tightly bound european economy where each nation cedes some authority over their policies, but what they get out of that is a much sounder european economy. so they've got a lot of work to do. >> but germany's requirements have proven difficult to meet and riots and political unrest are now the norm in many european capitols. >> the german population could say, "i'm outta here, i don't want to pay for this." they're, they're the strongest economy and they do have to pay for a lot of it. and the greeks, spanish could bail. i mean, we're seeing riots in the streets because unemployment's 25 percent and rising. and you know, if i'm a greek family and you know, i can't pay for my z-pack for my sick kid, i'm gonna be pretty upset. so i'm outta here, i could be outta here, just like argentina did back ten years ago. so things could go badly wrong. >> i've personally experienced the change of mood in my hometown, which is athens. i was born and raised in greece. over the last two and a half years watching what was a warm and welcoming city, for me, turning angry, turning at times extremely violent, with moments feeling like it was a war zone. and that's not just been in athens. >> if you look at southern europe, if you look at greece, there are demonstrations almost every day. if you look at spain, now more recently in italy, also a lot of demonstrations on the street. so unfortunately, i mean, different countries, people in different countries react different ways. and when people demonstrate too much on the streets, certainly it complicates very, very significantly the job of the government to try to sort out the situation. >> we've seen the same scenes in madrid. we've seen the same scenes in lisbon. essentially what you're seeing is just increasing anger because taxpayers know that they will have to foot the bill for this one. and also they feel that they've been continuously, chronically, criminally misrepresented by their governments. a feeling of frustration that i feel is global and citizens across the world can relate to. (instrumental music) >> describing it as "baptism by fire for a whole generation", today the head of the european commission warned that without greater unification, the e.u. would not be able to face the financial crisis. >> as the e.u. struggles to avoid complete collapse, some advocate a stronger union. >> right now, it's becoming increasingly obvious that unless the eurozone moves towards a greater union integration, meaning a fiscal union with common spending, revenues, public debt that is shared, a banking union with a european-wide deposit insurance, an economic union where this recession is stopped and there is economic recovery. >> you need time to create a fiscal union. you need time to create a banking union. you need time to allow the european heads of state to get together and create a roadmap for what kind of regulatory and constitutional changes you will need to get to the point that you actually have greater integration of european economic governance. >> so the eurozone, the major issue at the moment is the so-called banking union and we've heard a lot on how they should be introduced, what are the key points that should be deciding and how it should progress. another major issue is the so-called eurobond, thereby european union countries would issue joint and several liability bonds. now that would require certainly a new institutional framework, which guarantees, for example, it would be now the germans would pay for italy's debt. >> at the end of the day, europe and the eurozone face an existential question: can we become the united states of europe? can we have the more powerful members, like germany or the netherlands, essentially foot the bill, share risk? can we issue debts together? >> but standing in the way of unification is the reality that there are 17 different nations in the eurozone, each concerned about the welfare of its own people. >> there are very strong national political constraints. for example, in finland, which is one of the healthiest economies in the euro area, politicians simply don't understand why they have to pay, for example, for spain or portugal countries, which behave not in a responsible way before the crisis. so even though politicians i think understand, there are so many national interests that it would be very difficult to find a good solution. >> what of the german and austrian and dutch citizen who have always paid their taxes, who live in a law abiding society where the state works and they can depend on it and are now seeing their hard earned income being transferred to what they view as profligate countries? in europe, that kind of animosity coming from the ground level up can actually be extremely toxic and dangerous. what we've seen is a return to a kind of second world war system of stereotypes and cliches and national hatred. whereas the european project was supposed to put that to rest once and for all and bring european peoples together as europeans, rather than as greeks and germans or whatever. ♪ rule, britannia! ♪ britannia rule the waves... >> the eurozone crisis has done so much to undo the european project and perhaps that will be its saddest legacy. >> should these challenges to unification prove too great, what would a collapse of the euro mean? >> in the same way in which the collapse of lehman implied global shocks, a dissolve in the situation in the eurozone is going to impact the united states, china and many other parts of the world in a way that could be very severe and very extreme. >> you could break up in a neatly packaged way, very difficult, or you could break up messily, more likely. if the euro breaks up messily, that again is going to be a tremendous shock to the entire world financial system and we are still the biggest players in the world financial system. so we will not be immune to something like that, if it happens. >> it will continue to have a drag until the uncertainty around the euro has been resolved. we need firm rules for who can be in the euro and who can be out of the euro and what conditions they have to meet to make those transitions. and we need some sort of fiscal architecture to protect the euro against these enormous issuances of unsustainable debt. >> unfortunately, since that feels quite far away from where we're standing right now, we must contemplate the worst case scenario, which would be one country leaving the euro followed by several others. a complete collapse of confidence in the european project and the eurozone project, losing several banks, people on the streets, riots. (singing) (instrumental music) >> the u.s. treasury secretary tim geithner, concerned about the eurozone crisis, sought a meeting with the german finance minister wolfgang schauble on his holiday. in a statement, they said there was a need for global cooperation to resolve debt problems. >> as the european union's greatest ally and trading partner, what can the u.s. do to prevent a break up? >> well the eurozone is of course america's leading trade partner. and as a consequence, if the eurozone has very anemic growth, everyone that we want to export to in europe is going to buy less of our stuff. our ability to have our multi-nationals that have large manufacturing bases in europe, and there are many of them, are going to be producing less. they're going to be less profitable. they'll be laying people off. this is the danger. >> the united states' economy and the european union are extremely closely tied together. they are the two biggest economies in the world. they're almost roughly equivalent in size, about $15 trillion in output for each of them. and together, they make up about half of the whole world economy. >> one of the questions that i asked each of them was, "what could we do in the united states that would help with this crisis?" and every person on the panel said the most important thing we can do in the united states is to get our own fiscal house in order. >> the united states certainly has some accounting to do with respect to a regulatory system that was inadequate. >> the united states has made it clear, as has china and many other countries, that we are not writing checks. there's nobody that supports a marshall plan for europe. there's nobody that supports the americans leading a bailout. what we're doing is providing the europeans with a lot of advice. >> what the united states can do is make very clear that we have supported the cause of european integration for decades and that we see a strong and united europe as a very important ally for us and a very important anchor of stability in the world. and i think we need to be more vocal politically about our investment in the european union, in european integration. and the fact that we are, we're not just neutral bystanders hoping that everything doesn't collapse. >> for now, the eurozone's future remains uncertain. across europe and in washington, many are hoping for the best but bracing for the worst. >> there is hope that as these crises have spread, that there is more pressure on european leaders to come up with a, a grander solution to deal with the problems. just as here in the united states as we look at our challenges, the more we see the impact of those challenges, the more pressure there is to get a resolution. >> this is the hotel california. once you come in, there's no going out. and once everyone recognizes the hotel california, it'll stick together. so, there cannot be any bending on that, you have to be steadfast in that resolve. and make sure that the, that this works out. >> so a best-case scenario, given, given where we're standing right now is that the euro survives as a project, but is fundamentally changed. it's essentially redesigned. it's like euro 2.0. >> as the eurozone economies struggle to right themselves, one thing is clear, minimizing the effects of this crisis on america's own economic recovery will require great decisions. (instrumental music) >> to join a discussion group in your area or order a dvd of this series, visit greatdecisions.org or call 1-800-477-5836. great decisions is produced by the foreign policy association, inspiring americans to learn more about the world. sponsorship of great decisions is provided by credit suisse, eni, the hurford foundation, and pricewaterhousecoopers llp. >> next time on great decisions: iran's nuclear aspirations have furrowed brows from washington to tel aviv, but how can the u.s. stop tehran from building a bomb and at what cost? red line: iran, israel and the bomb, next time on great decisions. www.captionlink.com
MSNBC
Feb 2, 2013 5:00am EST
but maybe it is pennsylvania, maybe it is actually tom corbett eating the cobra. hard ball's up next. good night. >>> the pain of mccain. let's play "hardball." >>> good evenly iing. i'm chris matthews in washington. let me start with this. why is john mccain so gri? why america? why are we fighting the vietnam war all over again in the united states senate. the have it tree troll against chuck hagel. is it about lyndon johnson's inability to win that war or end it? what is it that burns so deeply in john mccain today? for some reason he wants to play it again and again in iraq and afterno afghanistan and again in iran. we look at the resentment burning in john mccain's heart. it's not against george w. bush and his political henchmen who tried to stay mccain's reputation in 2000 but a guy who fear and rallied against wounds just like he did. chuck hagel, a nightmare, by the way, whose flashbacks must haunt still the heart still of john sydney mccain. both are msnbc analysts. both of you, sir, and lady, are younger than me, but i must tell you i'm absolutely convinced we're watching a flashback. watch this. he did a long angry windup before he launched into his first so-called question which was really an indictment. it included putdowns as well as references to vietnam. let's listen. >> in january of 2007 in a rather bizarre exchange with secretary rice in the foreign relations committee after some nonsense about syria and crossing the border into iran and syria because of the surge, and a reference to cambodia in 1970 you said, quote, when you set in motion the kind of policy the president's talking about here, it's very, very dangerous. quote, matter of fact, i have to say, madam secretary, i think the speech given last night by this president represents the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since vietnam. if it's carried out, i will resist it. in march 2008 you said, quote, here the term "quagmire" could apply. >> what are these? the full bright hearings? i lived through them? this is kind of like a 1970s movie where you go back into the past where it never even happened. why is he fighting with him about vietnam. >> it's interesting. he's fighting with him over iraq but it seems to be vietnam. he seems to be mad that hagel took issue with him about iraq and compared it to vietnam being the big blunder, which, of course, hagel and mccain both served in. when mccain talks about iraq, he only wants to talk about it from the surge on. it's as if everything before that didn't happen and didn't count and we ask still debate whether it worked or not but the big decision is whether it was as big as vietnam. and he didn't want to have that argument. >> he dug into his ankle here and he wouldn't let go. let's listen again. back again to the old war. >> were you correct or incorrect when you said that the surge would be the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since vietnam? were you correct or incorrect? >> my -- >> yes or no. >> my reference to -- >> are you going to answer the question, senator hagel? the question is were you right or wrong? that's a pretty straightforward question. i would like the answer whether you were right or wrong, and then you're free to elaborate. >> i'm not going to give you a yes or no. think it's far more complicated that that. as i said, my answer is i'll defer that judgment to history. as to the comment i made about the most dangerous foreign policy decision since vietnam was about not just the surge but the overall war of choice going into iraq. >> well, there you have it. joy, your thoughts. you're younger, you've been through it, you lived through it in school. mccain is so angry. is it really about the surge? what is it? did they yell at each other in the cloak room? i'm trying to figure out the anger here. >> these guys both served as you said, chris, they were good friends in the arms and the senate. john mccain seems to be a man who's tormented hchl's tormented by the demons that have to do with the things he was denied. he was denied the presidency, so he couldn't stand george w. bush. he was denied it again and can't stand barack obama or anyone he nominates. in a way john mccain made the surge into the war as john mccain would have fought it as commander in chief and anyone who questions it gets the wrath of mccain. i watched that part of the hearing with colonel jack jacobs and patrick murphy, the former pennsylvania congressman who served in iraq. both of them were at the bottom of the pile as he called it. you just view war differently. but the lesson that these two men took from vietnam are so different. hagel took the questioning, the same as patrick murphy did, fielded lied to. >> here's lindsey graham. badgering hagel. badgering is the word for it. whether the iranian revolutionary guard should be termed a terroristic organization. i think this is aimed directly at south carolina's right wing. let's listen. >> if there was a vote on the floor of the senate this afternoon to label the iranian revolutionary guard, the people who have killed our soldiers in iraq, some of the most vicious people to the people of iran themselves, if there were a vote tomorrow or this afternoon, would you still vote no? >> i would want to know from the president what they were doing again. >> i mean you read the paper, watch tv. do you very in doubt what they're doing? >> if you had a chance tomorrow, today, after lunch, to vote to say the revolutionary guard was a terrorist organization, would you still vote no? >> well, the reason i voted no to start with -- >> well, i know why. you told me that. my question is would you reconsider and vote yes this time or vote no? >> times change, i recognize that, yes, i would reconsider, but the whole theory. >> thank you. that's encouraging. my time is up. >> do yyou want to know what th mccarthy period was like, the inquisition chamber, that. >> he didn't give him a chance to answer the question. it wasn't about him himself, it was about lindsey graham grandstanding for the five minutes he gets. congressional hearings have really gone downhill in the last 20, 25 years. you saw yesterday far more talk about what hagel might have said about israel a couple of years ago than about afghanistan. >> they wanted recanation. they wanted him to recant -- >> yes. >> excuse me. that's for you, joy. >> that's exactly right. >> an ecclesiastical proceeding. >> they feel like he turned on them, turn on their war, turned on their neocons and cry uncle. they see chuck hagel as the human roadblock and the some boll that barack obama, the president obama is not going to let them have their war in iran and that's what's the problem with chuck hagel. >> i say that again. you're so smart. >> i appreciate that. >> i'm serious. i think you're unbelievable. >> thank you, chris. >> i keep hearing my brain talk. thank you. i think we're redundant. coming up it's hillary clinton's last day at the white house. it's the first day of the rest of her life and it may well include campaign for 20106 president. she hasn't said she's going to run but there are plenty of democrats who say i do. >>> we showed you john mccain and lindsey graham's rude behavior and they're hardly alone. the lesson the gop seems to have learned from 2012, if you want to keep losing, keep doing what you're doing. fascinating. >>> the people in charge of dealing with palestinians and the occupied territories, turns out they're a lot more like barack obama than like benjamin netanyahu. finally let me finish tonight with a fabulous delegation of the united states senate now. elizabeth warren and edward and this is "hardball," the place for politics. to double-check the temperature on the thermometer, be ready. for high fever, nothing works faster or lasts longer. be ready with children's motrin. yeah, i'm looking to save, but i'm not sure which policy is right for me. you should try our coverage checker. it helps you see if you have too much coverage or not enough, making it easier to get what you need. [ beeping ] these are great! [ beeping ] how are you, um, how are you doing? i'm going to keep looking over here. probably a good idea. ken: what's a good idea? nothing. with coverage checker, it's easy to find your perfect policy. visit progressive.com today. for those nights when it's more than a bad dream, be ready. for the times you need to double-check the temperature on the thermometer, be ready. for high fever, nothing works faster or lasts longer. be ready with children's motrin. >>> i knew there was something really special about this place and that having the honor to lead the state department and usaid would be unique and singular, exciting and challenging. it has been all of those things and so much more. >> withing back to "hardball. "that was secretary hill ril clinton saying good-bye to men and women of the state. now let the campaign begin. donors are itching for the big drive in 2016. take a look at the cover of the issue of "newsweek." with me is former pennsylvania governor ed rendell and cynthia tucker. where would you put hillary versus cleopatra for history's sake? >> cleopatra immediately came to mind for me too. i think hillary clinton still probably has some history in front of her to make before she can be declared the most powerful woman in history. i'll put cleopatra a little ahead of her. >> we settled that. ed markey -- let me ask you, rendell, governor rendell, let me just try to bother you a little bit. back in 1979 you were convinced that ted kennedy could not be beat for president of the united states. you were out there with billy green. i'm trying to hold onto my speech-running job at the white house, you're trying to take it away from me. so times change. is it conceivable in your hillary hart that times could change of the next three years and she would not be hot to trot to run, that there may not be this ground-swept support for her? doug macarthur i'm told back in 1951 was unbeatable when he was fired by truman. a year later he was nothing. ike took it away. so is it true that hillary has the staying power so that four years from now she could be president? >> yeah, i think she does. ted kennedy, remember, was a fairly young senator and had hardly proven himself. general macarthur didn't know how to act in public service. hillary clinton has been on the scene for two decades and maz been on the dominant scene. chris, it is unbelievable. i can't walk a block in philadelphia without being stopped by someone who thrusts card in my hand and says when hillary runs, i want to give money. i haven't seen that in my 34 years of experience ever. not even the obama phenomenon matches the enthusiasm here. could something change? of course. remember, it's not really three years. if she wants to make a decision, she has to make a decision by next spring, spring of '14. if she makes that decision, she by and large preempts the democratic field. >> what would you do if you were talking? you'll probably be talking off and on. what do you tell joe biden he should do between now and then to be prepared to run but be prepared to hit the parachute if she does run? how do you hit both? >> he goes at it like he's going to be candidate because i tlink's still a decent chance hillary will denied not to run. i won't bet on it but i think there's a decent chance. joe should continue to make contact, talk to givers. the problem for joe is -- and people do love and respect joe. i'm in that category. but the givers, the people who are going to decide who really is the most powerful candidate, they're all like joe, but they're all for hillary right now. that's his biggest problem. >> and that's men and women both, right? >> men and women both. >> let me go to cynthia. let's take a look at this poll, most admired women of 2012. let's take a look at the numbers. it's not even close. 21% for her, the first lady at 5%, which is okay, i guess, but not great here. and oprah winfrey, who is like the most powerful woman in the history of the meade yarks televised media, look at her down there at 4%. it's really stunning the domination, if you will, of this one public figure. >> and i think that's well deser deserved, chris, i really do. think that she has not only done a phenomenal job as secretary of state, but she also -- she ran an excellent campaign in the primaries. and when she lost, she threw her support behind barack obama and worked very hard for him, and, of course, she was his loyal secretary of state. and i think that goes a long way with many people. their campaign was pretty bitter. their rivalry was pretty bitter. and i remember all of the questions in 2008. will hillary really join forces with barack obama? not only did she join forces, she worked hard for him, and she was his very loyal secretary of state. and i think for people all over the world, that goes a long way in building up their admiration for her. this was a woman who lost the campaign, but when she was called on, she gave it her all. >> well, let me ask you, governor. you're as good a pal as i know. what did she learn? somebody said recently, the secretary herself, there are lessons she learned looking back. it's easy to look back in 2008, was that she had to be a better communicator. that covers a lot of territory. i think what hurt her most is her vote for the iraq war. within the confines of the democratic caucus, that war was the issue, the opposition to it. and the fact that she voted for it gave issue to barack obama, a state senator in chicago. he volted against it without worrying about it. she hedged her thoughts and voted for it. it seem like the doesn't have that kind of impediment if she runs. >> if you remember her biggest problem was working-class women, blue collar women. and yet by the end of the campaign she was racking up huge majorities in virginia and kentucky and pennsylvania and places like that. she was attracting working-class women. she was a rock star in scranton and pittsburgh and places like that. she learned to communicate as a populist. and i think she learned to save some money for contingencies. >> i learned a lot too. >> any money after super tuesday she would have been a nominee, but she spent all her money and went down the chute. >> if you run it next time, you'll be better. i've got that look from some those working-class women. if you were against hillary, you're in big trouble. cynthia, you can't wait, can you? >> you know, i think that by 2014, the prospect of becoming the very first female president of the united states will be too powerful for hillary clinton to say no. she's also a person who could hold together what has become known as the obama coalition. >> thank you, cynthia tucker and my good friend ed rendell. thank you both for coming. happy friday. >>> up next, the sideshow. and this is "hardball," the place for politics. at first, jake's family thought they saved ziggy, but his connection with jake has been a lifesaver. for a love this strong, his family only feeds him iams. compared to other leading brands, it has 50% more animal protein... ...to help keep ziggy's body as strong as a love that reaches further than anyone's words. iams. keep love strong. for those nights when it's more than a bad dream, be ready. for the times you need to double-check the temperature on the thermometer, be ready. for high fever, nothing works faster or lasts longer. be ready with children's motrin. >>> back to "hardball." let's say you're a senator who has to take up the issue of gay marriage and there's something that would ban it entirely. in those circumstances you might expect it to be a hot topic with reporters, right? illinois senator schock saw it coming. >> why don't you support it? >> well, i just haven't. >> is there a reason? there seems to be a few states that have passed it. the needle is moving in a lot of polls. i wonder what the reason is? >> i think everybody has a set of beliefs on issues, social issues that has a situation of how you were raised and their believes. what you're seeing is reviews in how society's changed. >> that's a shock. he said he's considering running for governor of illinois. >>> next, what has nothing to do with the super bowl. it started when defensive back chris made comments on radio. to defend the teams overall position on gay rights some took part in a video for the "it gets better" project, a group that reaches out to teens that get bullied. >> there's nothing about being young. >> being yourself. >> every day bring different challenges. >> nothing that you should ever experience as being bullied, pressured or something you're not. >> the san francisco 49ers are proud to be supporters of itgetsbetter.org. >> believe in yourself, set goals for yourself. >> look to future and it will get better. >> that was last august but in an interview with saw today two of the viewers initially denied participation. one of them, ahmed brooks said, quote, i think if i made a video, i would remember it. this is america. if someone wants to be gay, they should be gay. we showed him the video and he said, oh, oh, that. that was a anti-bullying project. they have removed their ved owe from the website. that's "hardball" for now. coming up next, "your business" with j.j. ramberg. be ready. for high fever, nothing works faster or lasts longer. be ready with children's motrin. in the middle of the night it can be frustrating. it's hard to turn off and go back to sleep. intermezzo is the first and only prescription sleep aid approved for use as needed in the middle of the night when you can't get back to sleep. it's an effective sleep medicine you don't take before bedtime. take it in bed only when you need it and have at least four hours left for sleep. do not take intermezzo if you have had an allergic reaction to drugs containing zolpidem, such as ambien. allergic reactions such as shortness of breath or swelling of your tongue or throat may occur and may be fatal. intermezzo should not be taken if you have taken another sleep medicine at bedtime or in the middle of the night or drank alcohol that day. do not drive or operate machinery until at least 4 hours after taking intermezzo and you're fully awake. driving, eating, or engaging in other activities while not fully awake without remembering the event the next day have been reported. abnormal behaviors may include aggressiveness, agitation, hallucinations, or confusion. alcohol or taking other medicines that make you sleepy may increase these risks. in depressed patients, worsening of depression, including risk of suicide, may occur. intermezzo, like most sleep medicines, has some risk of dependency. common side effects are headache, nausea, and fatigue. so if you suffer from middle-of-the-night insomnia, ask your doctor about intermezzo and return to sleep again. ♪ just begin with america's favorite soups. bring out chicken broccoli alfredo. or best-ever meatloaf. go to campbellskitchen.com for recipes, plus a valuable coupon. campbell's. it's amazing what soup can do.
CBS
Jan 27, 2013 6:30am EST
>>> from washington, the "the mclaughlin group," the american original. for over three decades, the sharpest minds, best sources, hardest talk. >> "the mclaughlin group" is brought to you by siemens. across the country we're building answers for hospitals, utilities, cities, and factories, and we're building them to last. siemens. answers. >>> i take responsibility, and nobody is more committed to getting this right. >> secretary of state hillary clinton gave the details of that responsibility this week at two congressional hearings. one in the senate, one in the house. on what happened at the u.s. consulate at benghazi, libya, four and a half months ago on september 11th. four americans were killed in the attack, including the u.s. ambassador to libya, christopher stevens. secretary clinton became emotional as she described the scene at andrews air force base in maryland just outside washington, d.c. >> i stood next to president obama as the marines carried those flag-draped caskets off the plane at andrews. i put my arms around the mothers and fathers, the sisters and brothers, the sons and daughters and the wives left alone to raise their children. >> in libya, before the attack, ambassador stevens cabled the state department, asking for more security. at the hearing, the secretary was asked about hothis request and others like them from the u.s. embassy in libya were handled. >> the specific security requests pertaining to benghazi, you know, were handled by the security professionals in the department. i didn't see those requests. they didn't come to me. i didn't approve them, i didn't deny them. >> hearing this, senator rand paul on the senate foreign relations committee said this to the secretary. >> had i been president at the time and i found that you did not read the cables from benghazi, you did not read the cables from ambassador stevens, i would have relieved you of your post. i think it's inexcusable. >> >> we were misled that there were supposedly protests, then something sprang out of that, an assault sprang out of that and that was easily ascertained that that was not the fact, and the american people could have known that within days, and they didn't know that. >> with all due respect, the fact is we had four dead americans. >> i understand. >> was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk who decided they'd go kill some americans? what difference at this point does it make? it is our job to figure out what happened and can to preve happening again, senator. >> is she right? what difference does it make? or is she wrong? >> i think it does make a difference, john, but i think she handled herself extremely well. there are three questions. why was security not provided despite the pleas. why was help not sent to these guys over seven hours of attacks, and what is responsible for the massive cover-up and fake stories about this video, anti-muslim video. she said to the third, i had nothing to do with the talking points, nothing to do with the military, i take responsibility for the lack of security. however, all these memos and cables that came, they all didn't come into my office personally, but i take responsibility. i think she handled it well, john. and the issue i think is pretty much gone now, and the republicans did it not succeed in what they were trying to cue. >> how would you describe hillary clinton at the house and the senate hearings? what kind of an adjective would you use? >> i would say she was commanding, i would say she was presidential. she came across very much as someone who is shouldering responsibility but she also avoided taking any of the blame. that was a very good balancing act, and she handled all of the questioning, and i thought she brought some reality to this. the republicans say, the state department could easily have known what was happening. first of all, what we've learned since is this outpost was basically a cia operation. you don't talk about these things in public. the right wing had this fantasy that they were watching the demonstrations and the attack unfold in real-time on video. none of that happened. and she, i think, really turned back the notion that this was a minutive event on the part of the administration to deny that this was a terrorist attack. this was basically something that happened in a very chaoti situation. the republicans tried to turn it into watergate, and it didn't work. >> she also waited a few months, which is not what sun rice did, and susan rice got into deep trouble. in other words, shmonths. >> she had nothing to do with the aftermath, john. >> who didn't? >> susan rice. that's all the aftermath. >> you don't understand me. susan rice went on television early. >> she was sent out to do it. >> she, did and hillary waited, and she did -- that helped her in this presentation. >> she escaped the initial heat of all this, and she had a lot of time to think of a good way to kind of get out of the blame game here. and really, this hearing, i think the wfort thing about this hearing, aside from the politics, we still walked away without any answers. there are, yes, four dead americans, one of whom was pleading for extra help, extra security from the state department, and he didn't get it. and there were no clear answers as to why. all we got out of it was that hillary clinton was not to blame. >> hillary clinton has traveled almost a million miles since she's been secretary of state. that means she's been absent from the state debt. however, with modern technology that should be no problem, but there is something missing when there is no physical presence. do you think that there should be some -- this is a serious question. there should be some evolution, either in our thinking about the role of no other person in her position has traveled that much and been away that much. should she be -- should that be a presidential envoy special assignment, special condition separate from her cabinet position? >> you know, in that particular role, dealing with our foreign policy, there is no substitute for having the secretary of state develop personal relationships and get a direct feel from the people that she is trying to deal with and trying to move towards an american position, whatever that may be, so i don't think you can do it. i don't think you can send a substitute. it just goes with the territory. the secretary of state has to be prepared to travel all around the world. those personal relationships are critical for the ability of the united states to bring people along with her. >> she stands alone. no other secretary of state has ever traveled that much. they've never been away that much. >> maybe not that much, but secretaries of state have been traveling a heck of a lot more over the last few years. >> are you saying she has redefined the secretary of state position and role? >> no, no, no. >> i think what she does is a part and has been a part of the secretary of state role -- >> i bet they haven't even traveled a quarter of the miles. >> john, you ought to have somebody there -- >> she surpassed a predecessor, i think it was madeline al bright who held the record. >> what was albright's record? >> this is a million miles. >> excuse me, hillary just passed that record in the last couple of months. so it's not that big a deal. >> john what you're saying -- >> pat, please, i would like to finish. >> go ahead. >> in terms of the accountability here, there was an accountability aboard that she appear pointed that reported, that calls for like 29 different reforms which goes step by step where it was broken down, and maybe she should have read those cables, and i would hope that john kerry -- >> she doesn't have to. with the enhanced technology we have. >> john, let me talk to your point. >> she is not going to read every cable. >> the cable was addressed to her. we have a copy of the cable on this broadcast. >> john, let me talk to your point. you're exactly right. if she is going to do this million miles of travel there ought to be an executive deputy of hers at the state department in the building. >> i'm sure she had that. >> why didn't he or she have the cables and read them? >> the problem is -- >> people lost their jobs over this. >> this is all the nitty-gritty here. the overall problem with what happened in libya was that the obama administration didn't want us to be heavily armed there because we were trying to develop a relationship and they wanted to look as though we were, you know, on friendlier > africa. let's get into that. africa. what's the big picture? >> benghazi did not happen in a vacuum. the arab revolutions have scrambled power dynamics and shattered security forces across the region. instability in mali has created an expanding safe haven for terrorists who look to expand their influence and plot further attacks of the kind we saw just last week in algeria. >> what happened last week in algeria, north africa, was the murder of at least 37 hostages, including three americans at the militants attack a natural gas plant in the eastern part of the country. the al-qaida splinter group called the signers with blood brigade claimed responsibility. question is the volatility in north africa an outcome of the arab spring, or does it predate the arab spring? patrick. >> john, some of it predates the arab spring, but what this shows, and what the hillary thing was about, the complete disaster of what we done libya. we dumped over this corrupt dictator and all these forces moved out of there. they went into mali. you have al-qaida in the mob grab moving through that, they're in mauretania and niger. the point of this is the administration covered up the fact that al-qaida was not on the run, it was not on the path to defeat, it was responsible for what happened in benghazi, and it is all over the place now. >> we're letting the french handle things now. i think it's more kind of leading from behind on foreign policy, and it's incredibly dangerous, because as pat was saying, al-qaida is not on the run, they're on the rise, and nothing is being done about it. >> al-qaida central has been virtually decimated, but what they espouse, or all over the place, i think the administration -- you have to be engaged but you handle in a different way. they're not going to put boots on the ground. they're going to assist the french. the french have more of an interest in mali than we do. you are going to see more use, probably of drones. the administration is not ignoring this area. all of the critics are out there saying do this, do this, do this. like what? nobody really has any great answers. >> i have a question for you. africa is rich in natural resources. the chinese know that. the chinese have penetrated a lot of africa. are we missing the boat? >> well, i don't know that we're missing the boat, but certainly china is in a very different position than us, and they have the people who can go in there and live in that kind of environment. >> what does that mean? >> it means it's a much more difficult owe. >> no, what does it mean about the chinese you're talking about? >> they have a huge appetite for the natural resources. >> and we don't? >> oh no, we do, but we have other resources. the fact that this is something that gives them a primary call on a lot of resources of the region. they've put in a lot of money. we haven't been willing to do that. >> we have two reasons for being there. one, africa is a central front with al kay dan. number two, these resources that we really have not been attending to in any fashion resem bling the chinese. >> that's true. >> chinese will deal with anybody. they're right there in the sudan. they will go and deal with anybody. >> they were in africa early. >> they put cash on the barrel head. they're all over latin america, all over africa, john. they are dealing in a commercial mercantile way with these regimes, and we have a foreign policy that deals of of israel. meet yahir lapide. >> a new arrival on the scene is and personality lapide who leads israel. why has netanyahu lost steam? >> this is a very interesting revolution. there's no doubt but this election, in fact with the defeat for netanyahu. >> meaning what? he won the election. >> he may be the next prime minister. his party went down. >> who, yahir? >> no, netanyahu's own party went down from 42 seats to 31 seats. so his party had fewer seats. this guy came out of nowhere. his first time running for office. he got 19 seats. he became the most -- the second most important party in -- out of nowhere. so he has become the star of this thing. and netanyahu is going to have to make a deal with him. all of the politicians are splintered but it's never been like this. now netanyahu is going to have to move, if i may say so, this is now a center right. it is going to be much more pragmatic and open. >> how long is his term? >> five years, isn't it? >> it can be as much as five years but it almost never lasts five years because the coalition breaks up. >> how long do you think he will be prime minister? >> i think the next three years at least. >> what happened to ohlmert? >> in my judgment if he had been prime minister or sharon, or rabin, you would have had a settlement in the israeli palestine. >> he did not exactly come out of nowhere. he's been a popular on-camera broadcaster. his father created a centrist party. he looks like an israeli george clooney and has captured the imagination of the young. his main issue was the ultra orthodox should not be exempt from military service, so i think he is a critical player here going forward. >> i just want to know whether netanyahu -- >> no, john. >> not now. >> i think netanyahu may be on the way out. we will see how this government works. >> john, he is going to put together a coalition. >> it's political pressure from his within his own cabinet. it is not going to be from the right. >> it is going to be from the right. look, you've got lapide's party, netanyahu, his own partner in there, and the shah's party is going to be there. >> what's the point? >> the coalitions of the good, the bad, and the ugly. >> when we come back -- >> and the center. that's good. >> when we come back, >>> issue two. inauguration day. >> we, the people, declare today that the most evident of truths, that all of us are created equal, is the star that guides us still, just as it guided our fore bearers through seneca falls and selma and stonewall, just it is a guided all those men and women, sung and unsung, who left footprints along this great mall to hear a preacher say that we cannot walk alone, to hear a king proclaim that our individual freedom is inextricably bound to the freedom of every soul on earth. >> on inauguration day, monday, president barack obama gave his second inaugural address to the nation. it ran 18 minutes and was delivered before a throng of >> question was president obama's speech unabashedly liberal? i ask you, susan. >> of course. everything he said from talking about gay marriage, immigration reform. all these things part and parcel of the liberal agenda. if anything, a lot of people saying, if you are reading twitter, wow this is surprising that he is willing to go right into gay marriage. he's the first person in an inaugural speech to say the word gay. it was very liberal. >> this is the problem that the republicans face. if they think all these great issues of the day are solely the province of the democratic party and liberalism, they are never going to win another election. i say the president did a great job rooting these ideals and these values in the great traditions of the past and referencing them to the founding fathers, talking about what dwight eisenhower did. >> hold on, pat. >> it was a stirring piece that will go down in history. >> if you think the stone wall riot in a gay brash in greenwich village can be traced all the way back to bunker hill and the founding fathers you don't read what the founding fathers believed or say. >> let's play another bite of the president. excuse me. let's play another bite of at the present time, a living document. >> the president alluded frequently to the u.s. constitution. the nation's founding document. one that the president made clear is not set in stone. >> we have always understood that when times change, so must we. that fidelity to our founding principles requires new responses to new challenges. being true to our founding documents does not require us to agree on every contour of life. it does not mean we all define liberty inexactly the same way. or follow the same precise path to happiness. progress does not compel us to settle centuries long debate about the role of government for all-time, but it does require us to act in our time. >> question. given this passage is there any doubt in your mind that president obama's view is that the u.s. constitution is antiquated? >> i wouldn't say antiquated but i would say that it's pastime for people to hide behind the constitution and fail to face the challenges of today. and the most immediate issue that comes to mind, of course, is gun violence. and to rely on a second amendment that basically talks about creation -- creating militias to put down rebellion to apply that today to an unfettered right to have assault weapons with 30 or 60 rounds so you can go out and gun down little children, that then the constitution can be interpreted in a more elastic way. >> don't you think he's doing us a favor by remaining us that it is a living document and it must be accommodated to the conditions of today, but that doesn't necessarily has to be ripped apart or ignored in any respect. >> i agree with both sides of what you just said but it is a living document. it has been evolving throughout the history of this country. the courts ultimately are going to be the deciders, as we say, over how far it can go and how far government can go, but there is no doubt but we allow this constitution and nurture this constitution as a living document because conditions change in the country. >> but, john, he is claiming, i mean, eleanor calls it his ref liewrks and she's right, but the roots on gay rights, modern feminism and all the rest go back to the nineteen sick. they do not go back to the constitution of the united states, which was written by people that did not believe in equality. >> are they consistent with the constitution? >> the wordy quality is not in the constitution, it's not tin bill of rights and not tin federalists papers. >> does that many it's excluded from the thinking of the founding fatters? >> the revolution is a modern thing and cannot betrayed back. >> does it mean that as a living document you can find it in the constitution but it is not going to be obvious? >> he can put it in the constitution by subterfuge but it is not there. >> revolution is not a modern thing. revolution goes back to the beginning of this country. and when you -- >> and you cannot after document -- >> let susan in. >> the tone, when talking about the constitution during that speech was a little dismissive like, yeah, there's a constitution, but we can work around it. >> do you share that view? did she use the -- she used the word dismissive. >> i think she's exactly right. >> do you think so? >> it was ref rential. >> you do think so. was it dismissive at all? >> no, reverential. >> this is a constitutional document so we have to pay it appropriate reverence, but it cannot be frozen, otherwise our country would come to a halt. so it is the role of government and ultimately the role of the courts as we saw in the 1930s to allow -- >> point of fact, we have treated it as a living document. >> absolutely. >> but it works. nevertheless. because the seeds of what -- of these -- for example, the women's right to vote and all that, all of that is there, but it's -- so it's not really antiquated in the -- it's living, but that's the point he wanted to make. >> if we didn't allow it to be interpreted in some ways it would become an antiindicated document ?roo. we'll be right back with (woman) 3 days of walking to give a breast cancer survivor a lifetime-- that's definitely a fair trade. whoo! you walk with friends, you meet new friends, and you keep those friendships. it was such a beautiful experience. (woman) ♪ and it's beautiful ♪ undeniable (woman) why walk 60 miles in the boldest breast cancer event in history? because everyone deserves a lifetime. visit the3day.org to register or to request more information today. ♪ burning like a fire ♪ building up from deep inside it was 3 days of pure joy. susan g. komen's investments in early detection and treatment have helped reduce breast cancer mortality in the u.s. by 33% since 1990. help us continue serving the millions of women and men with breast cancer who still need us every day. register for the 3-day now. (woman) it's just been an amazing, amazing journey. i love these people. ♪ and it's beautiful >>> out of time. bye-bye!
CSPAN
Feb 3, 2013 7:00am EST
later, the president of women tribe worldwide tax about the state of women's rights. " washington journal host: good morning. we will learn more about immigration with the judiciary committee. the senate could work this week on the chuck hagel nomination. the question remains whether or not republicans will block the nomination with a filibuster. the president traveling to push for slacker gun laws. with the nation focusing on the super bowl, we want to turn to washington's role on regulating the nfl. we will use super bowl sunday to talk about government regulations when it comes to the issue of steroids or head injuries. the phone lines are open. let's begin with a look at some of the headlines courtesy of the museum. from "the san francisco chronicle" -- from "the baltimore sun" -- let's turn to the politics and policy behind the nfl. this is a story a few days ago from "the washington post." outlining a plan and a letter to the executive director of the players union. they agreed as part of a 2011 collective bargaining agreement that the players should be tested for hgh, but the two sides of that agreed. two seasons have been played without it. last weekend in new orleans, roger goodell was asked a number of questions including one on the issue of head injuries. here is more from last week. [video clip] >> i welcome the president's comments. we want to make sure people understand what we are doing to make our game safer, not just in the nfl but throughout sports. the changes we are making a in the nfl are changing all of sports. it is a better recognition of head injuries. of treating them conservatively. that affects every sport beyond sports. for the troops overseas. what we are doing is leading the way to make sure people understand that you need to treat these injuries seriously. host: the head of the nfl responded to a statement made by the president in an interview with the republic. we are talking about the issue of the nfl and the federal government, whether there needs to be more regulations. caller: good morning. i just want to comment that with injuries and any sport and any injury, i think -- i was a medic in the coast guard. the cold constricts the blood flow. it helps control the blood flow. ice -- cold and pressure. i think ice needs to be there with the trainers and immediately when somebody is down. if ice is applied with nominal pressure to an injury, i think it would really help. i would like to make a comment about drug use. a and 67 years old, i do nordic ski racing in the winter and bicycle racing in the summer -- mountain and road banks -- bikes. i and disappointed and lance armstrong. unfortunately, drugs are really prevalent a in all sports. i suspect some of my colorado competitors close to the south -- host: on that issue when it comes to human growth hormone, should there be more government regulation? is there -- caller: the u.s. anti-dumping agency is working the best that they can. there just needs to be more drug testing. host: thank you for the call. steve is joining us from minnesota. caller: good morning. you know -- am i on? host: you sure are. caller: the building behind you. when these people get into it, they really screwed up. i do not know. host: ok. we will leave it there. our question, should there be more regulations on this super bowl sunday? a story from politico. if you are watching the game tonight, you will see a 32nd spot. the headline -- " super --2013: bloomberg-founded mayors' group sponsors gun control ad." the ad calls for lawmakers to pass rules requiring background checks. it is narrated by children with "america, the beautiful"playing in the background. where are you calling from? you are on the air. caller: i would like to comment that if the president and government is so worried about injuries a dental health, maybe they should consider the abortion issue and the disproportionate killing of african american babies. host: ok. from "the new republic." he was asked about football injuries at the high school level and the nfl and he said "i am a big football fan, but if i had a son, i would have a eddy is joining us from greenville, south carolina. caller: good morning. it bought these brain injuries, as far as i can see, i do not care what kind of helmet they design, the brain has a membrane in there. the brain is traveling back and forth against the skull, that is what is causing the problem. ok? for them to do that, they have to play football. host: why should the government step in if they are stupid enough to take hgh? let's go to the news conference when the nfl was asked about head injuries but also the use of steroids by players. [video clip] >> you are correct. in the collective bargaining agreement we did agree tho hgh testing. we agree to neutral arbitration. we will do that as soon as we reach an agreement on the hgh which i expect and hope will be very soon. we have moved down that path and any effective way. host: from last thursday, the head of the nfl to questions on a wide range of topics including head injuries and the use of steroids. the question we are asking, should there be more oversight, more regulations. caller: you have a collective bargaining agreement that would typically control the field on this. absent some type of controlled substance issue -- whether they will agree to testing, the h g h issue is likely regulated as a controlled substance. under those issues, it is whether you will test for it. specifically with regard to concussions. then you have whether congress should step and, regulate, running on a separate track. i think the pochette issue is probably the clearest path. --osha issue is the safest path. have a regulatory scheme in place to deal with it. i think this is something osha could at least inquire about. there is a clear path. if congress wants to look back, there is a clear path to do that and start that kind of an inquiry under existing regulations. >> thank you for the call. from the twitter from-- you can join us online on twitter.com. many already weighing in on the facebook page. caller: good morning. i would just like to say that as a player in the nfl, i do not see it any different as a person who joins the military. maybe one day you might be sent off to fight in a war. you could be shot and killed. playing in the nfl, you could possibly be injured gravely. i do not see any difference in either one of them. host: let me go back to the "washington post" story/ . they have been unable to launch a population study that the union says is necessary to determine what constitutes a positive test for athletes. they have been unsuccessful in their previous attempts to push negotiations forward. congress' increasing the pressure on the issue of human growth hormones and their use in the nfl. our question this morning, what should the role of the federal government be. frank is joining us. caller: i wanted to call and answer your question with a simple no. there should be no government intervention. i do believe the government should perhaps enter into concerns over the ncaa rules and regulations committee in north america because i think the author and patriarch of many of the problems that we have as it is related to reference identification and location, the reality of problems as they are with the team owners, to managers, a team investors. i have been concerned over reports there is a complete non bias in the ncaa as it relates to our national athlete, whether a high school player, a college player, are a professional player. i think we investigate the circumstances we will see the elements of investment, portions of what are simply unattainable of maturity to the ncaa, but all for a reference of a great liability to our players and surrounding personnel. host: thank you for the call from alabama. here is the twiter page. some other news on this sunday morning. the republican guillemot to filibuster or not to filibuster over chuck hagel. one senator announcing he will support chuck hagel, is a fellow senator from nebraska. caller: good morning. i just wanted to say, it is an undue burden on of minorities that cannot get i.t. to vote to have to get a background check for a gun. the government just misses up everything they do. how can they get a gun if they are going to do a background check if they do not have an id? host: thank you. another story from "the washington post." the reporting of greg miller and joby warrick. jason is joining us from waterville, maine. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i think people understand professional sports -- it is the government's role to help assist and a grow the culture and help our culture transformed as time goes on and as people transform. i think there is some things we provide professional sports benefits with. fundamentally, over all, i think as a government, we are wasting our time creating councils and creating panels where politicians sit on them and make decisions about athletics when in actuality they need to be making decisions about foreign policy and how we get people back to work in this country. i think we need to focus on that instead of trying to prosecute barry bonds for lying about taking steroids. that is not the biggest issue in the world. the biggest issue is starving kids on the street. thank you for your time. i would like to give a shout out to bobba bouy. host: on the trail of a senatorial scandal. two stores related to senator menendez. prostitutes fill its streets. next to that with a picture who denies any wrongdoing, women named by the tipsters exist, but not anymore. it points out the shadowy tipster that made the allegation involving bob menendez and underage prostitutes and the dominican republican gave names. despite the details, the women are nowhere to be found. inside "the washington post," giving him the worst week in washington. from oklahoma, good morning. caller: i do not mean to be rude about this. but with all of the regulations going on, it is kind of silly. how far do you go with it. it is getting silly. how far do you go with this stuff? host: thank you for the call. it relates to comment on all of this. jim is from rhode island. good morning. caller: i do think we need some regulation. but to our own devices, they could put the lions out there in the coliseum and it would be a good pay-per-view audience for that. another is a little extreme, but i think you need some regulations so when the kids are playing football and so forth. host: where do you draw the line? do you start at the high school level? is that the responsibility of local school districts or county or the state? caller: well, i just think they have to start somewhere. there are way too many head injuries. i think it is worth looking into. host: to try for the call. rick is joining us from pennsylvania. -- thank you for the call. caller: hockey has not done this study. soccer has not done it or you are hit constantly with a ball going 80 miles per hour. i have been around athletics for most of my adult life. i have seen young men play high school, college football bowl onto live productive healthy lives. i think of anyone took a percentage of people playing football, the percentage of injuries would be -- one is too many. it would be a very small percentage. the nfl is different. airplane 20 games a year, really playing two seasons where most colleges play 10 or 11 games. i have read an article, perdue has developed a helmet that will be twice as safe as the one being used now. i think the game at the high school and college level is safer than it has ever been. host: 21 for the call. next is steve from kansas on the line for republicans. the nfl and the federal government, should there be more regulations? caller: i am not sure there should be more regulations. the game itself is a violent sport. i played it. the companies that manufacture helmets, pads, and this and that to make the game a safer sport, you know, they are making their money. what the point is, all of the companies that are making the bunny -- i played at colorado state. i knew all of the money was coming in every time we went to a ballgame and all of the tv companies are coming and the. they did not give a shit -- host: i will stop you there. thank you for sharing the experience up until these swearword. we apologize for that. is your saying "it is not the government's role." we normally do not talk about sports on this program, but we are asking about the public policy side of all of this. the president weighing in on an interview with "the new republican"saying he would have to give serious thought if he had a son whether or not he would want his son to play football. the role hgh is playing with players, should there be more government regulations? next is a mark from long beach, california. caller: good morning. i was thinking the problem football is having as they are not politically correct. the politically correct crowd is after them. they should get some women playing football. obama thinks because his son should not play football because it is dangerous. sending females into front-line combat units -- that is not too dangerous. in the twisted liberal mind, we have to get women -- we have to get a couple of players to admit they are homosexuals. then it will become a cause -- host: thank you for the call. a front page under the fold, a picture getting a lot of attention. this photograph, an executive order pulled to document the president's skeet shooting. we will talk more about this and a couple of minutes. naperville, ill., good morning on the republican line. caller: yes. i think the officials should take some responsibility as far as blowing the whistle sooner. umpires should take more responsibility. host: to life for the call. from "the new york daily news," "bam." a picture snapped last august, it shows his mastery of shotgun while skeet shooting. the white house released the photograph saturday, possibly to muzzle critics suggested obama was posturing when he talked about shooting in an interview with "the new republic magazine." this is how the story plays out inside the new york times. he claims shooting is a hobby and the white house offers evidence. back to your calls on the issue of the nfl. should there be regulations when it comes to the players and the players union? claudia is on the independent line. caller: i was wondering what the rate of injury is in rugby. i used to be a real football fan. i watch rugby when i get a chance. it is a really rough game, but they do not wear helmets or too much padding. host: to live for the call. brian is next. -- thank you for the call. caller: hey, man, what are you into? host: we will go next to mississippi. caller: i think the government has its head into many things right now. the tax dollars are going to go up more. we need less programs, and more states rights. host: thank you for the call. susan brooks, a republican of indiana, giving the gop response as congress comes back to work this week. the ongoing debate over the rising debt and deficit and how to rein in government spending. here is a portion of the address. [video clip] >> i recently voted to present the democratic majority in the u.s. senate with a simple but powerful challenge. pass a budget, or you do not get paid. by forcing senate democrats to finally live up to one of the most basic responsibilities of governing, we are presenting them with a golden opportunity to confront and fall -- solve our spending program. we are holding president obama accountable for the sequestered cuts he first proposed in 2011. republicans want to replace the sequester, which is a series of harmful across the board cuts with better, common-sense cuts and reforms. all of this will require democrats to finally get serious about the spending problem. each of the last two years, the republican-led house has passed a responsible budget that addresses what is driving the debt to put our country on a path to prosperity. unfortunately, it has been for years some senate democrats last pass the budget. 1000, 375 days to be exact. -- 1600 -- 1 does a 300 of the five days to be exact. -- 1,375. i am worried that our nation posted children will pay in dollars and opportunities for our failure to lead. remarkably, there are leaders who do understand why it is so important for us to have a budget. one senate democrat said a budget was not all that meaningful. another said it would be foolish. i respectfully disagree. i am sure many hard-working parents do as well. solving these questions is why i ran for congress and the first place. a budget matters to americans who cannot afford to see their taxes go up or lose the jobs that would be destroyed in the process. a budget matters to people who worry about protecting and saving critical programs like medicare and social security. a budget matters to younger workers who fear more and more money will be taken from their paychecks to find another generation spending spree. host: susan brooks of illinois. back to your calls and questions and comments from the nfl. the super bowl gets under way tonight in new orleans. alex is joining us next from new york city. caller: my comment is -- i am not particularly a sports fan. it seems very repetitive back and forth. as far as the regulation -- my observation, not just about football but hockey and also even baseball -- people seem to like people getting hit and getting beat up. they even like people looking kind of distorted like when they take drugs. i would be in favor if there could be a lot to prevent head injuries or young people being persuaded to do drugs to get onto teams or whatever. it is my commentary to my fellow americans the sunday morning that, it is like gladiatorial combat. . "the hunter games." it is almost like a freak show you enjoy watching human suffering. that is my cheery comment. host: thank you for the call. on the twitter page, there is this. back in 2009, tiki barber testified on the issue of head injuries at the high school and professional lover -- level. [video clip] >> you hear the file but comes from people who think the nfl is not addressing this issue. at the end of the day, it is a player pose a choice. when we get injured, we break our arm, our figures, pull our handsprings, ultimately the doctor gives us advice. it is our choice to go back into the football game. at a high school level, it is not so much so. my ask of you is that you find a way to mandate that every high school athletic program has access to medical doctors who can diagnose, understand, and treat concussions so it seems to try to emulate and be like me in the current players and the national football league know the dangers of playing the sport that we all love it. host: four years ago, tiki barber testifying on head injuries. one of the number of hearings congress has taken in recent years. the question more broadly we are asking is, should there be more regulation and oversight by congress and the federal government when it comes to the nfl. we are asking this question because it is super bowl sunday. virginia is on the phone from tennessee. good morning. caller: good morning. yes, i would like to ask the nfl to please pay for their own problems instead of going through the government to get money from the tax payer. the nfl has more money than the government does. i thank you for considering the thought. host: thank you for the call. from up a " the washington post." this is a photograph as he was cheered on by members of the senate colleagues, democrats and republicans as he returned to washington one year after suffering a stroke and going through extensive rehabilitation. kenneth is joining us from north carolina. good morning. caller: yes. i had a comment about the nfl thing. there is not a whole lot of difference as far as i am concerned. the government almost things as both of them. there are certain things about the criminals and the street that the government will go out and try to protect the criminals before they do the citizens. in the nfl they do the same thing. the protect the guys that make the most money before they leave. that is the way they operate. i do not see why it is such a strange argument. host: to buy for the call. from the twitter page, there is this. front page of "the new york times." that story this morning from "the new york times." mike is joining us from iowa. on the democrats' line. good morning. caller: yes, with the nfl regulations, i think it is in the different -- like the last caller said. if they had those guys out directing them to hit certain people, i think that is wrong. i had another comment on the government regulations. while obama is in this miss, his first four years or from the miss from 10 years of republicans from 10 years of wars. it will take obama a long time and even the next president to get this next -- this message fixed. host: thank you for the call. from "cq weekly" -- from "new york times magazine" -- the impact of the shale boom in north dakota. "the weekly standard" focusing on the debt, the deficit, and its impact on the children. the president speaking about these issues in his weekly address. here is more. [video clip] >> we all agree it is critical to cut unnecessary spending. we cannot cut our way to prosperity. it has not worked in the past, and it will not work today. it should -- it could slow down the recovery. it could cost us jobs. much as number in the future. let's make the investments we cannot afford to live without. embarrassment's and education and infrastructure. research and development -- investments and education and infrastructure. already republicans and democrats of work together to reduce deficits by $2.50 trillion. that is a good start. to get the rest of the way, we need a balanced set of reforms. for example, we need to lower the cost of health care and programs like medicare that are the biggest drivers of the deficit. these reforms must go hand in hand with eliminating excess spending in the tax code so the wealthiest individuals can ticket veg of loopholes and deductions the kind of bailable to most americans. it can be a year solid growth, more jobs, and higher wages. that will only happen of reporters up to self-inflicted wounds. host: the president in his weekly address. the earlier debt limit with $16.40 trillion. we have surpassed that. you can keep track of it at usdebtclock.org. it is now $60.50 trillion. the next debate over the debt limit is likely to come up mid may. a story from "the weekly standard." we need a better argument against the debt. she writes -- back to your calls on the issue of the nfl and the federal government. should there be more regulations on this super bowl sunday? terry is joining us from carolina on the independent line. caller: you have made mention of the state regulating. i think all sports should be clean. in regards to issues of the government, -- i am a victim of natural disaster. there are so many more serious issues to just bypass those and focus on sports. i find that to be silly. i do believe they should be clean. states should regulate it. host: thank you for sharing your thoughts and comments. a lot of attention on no. 52. tonight.s' final game the next call is from been sent on the democrats' line. caller: good morning. i wanted to make a comment. the sixth of february is national signing day for high school football players and athletes. i just wanted to mention the fact that here in florida, football is so big. it is so important because of the fact it gives young men and opportunity to go to college. they have a hard time realizing that the risk of injury is there. they cannot make it a priority brimstones -- we need to understand what is happening as a lot of spots in this country, they have to play this game the right way and learn how to tackle the right way. learn how to not use their home that when they are playing the tackle first. when i was a kid i was taught to drive my shoulders instead of my head. i believe that is one of the problems going on in sports today. host: is that the role of the coaches and players? is it the role of the federal government, especially when it comes to the nfl? caller: absolutely not. i was about to say, you will get as much feedback from the government or you will get as much cooperation from areas about regulation in sports in this area as you well with gun control. host: 21 for the call. some other headlines. rosa parks is commemorated on what would have been her 100th birthday. from "the miami herald." a journey from a quiet for the kid to a ferocious football icon. we are talking football and the role of the federal government. one of our viewers saying, only the republicans could make a ball regulations a federal issue. thomas is joining us from illinois. good morning. caller: i have had a really deep concern about the far left and the far right. actually, the far left is as dangerous as the far right. ultimately, the two are in collusion, one and the other. i have been concerned with the far left and the far right and the corporations doing the best they can to dismantle the effectiveness of the federal government by eliminating regulations and the fda, the epa, the nfl, and everything else. they want to develop and anarchy regarding regulation. this business about the states and the local governments should have the exclusive power. they are trying to divide and conquer the people of the united states of america. for instance, a homosexual marriage. they're saying it should be a state issue. there are going to take away the effectiveness of the federal government. they know if they get a few states to allow an anarchy, it is going to spill over into other states. there is nothing the federal government can do about it. i am against them and setting up a corporate dictatorship. areas that. host: we are going to go back to the president was a comment. it spurred a lot of discussion about football and football injuries. he told "the new republic" -- as the president looks at this board as a fan of this board but also somebody who understands the risk of injury. coming up, we will turn our attention to marc ginsberg who has served as the ambassador to morocco as we look at the new foreign policy team in place by obama. later, the 1986 immigration reform law. what was in it and what to learn from it? first, it looked as some of the other shows, including the super bowl that will face a nation. >> the super bowl will be the topic of some discussion, a lot with president obama's second term agenda, gun violence, and immigration. we read air the show starting at noon at"meet the press." today, leon panetta and martin dempsey. at 1:00 here "this week." the former d.c. public schools chancellor makes an appearance and lou barletta. "fox news sunday" with wayne la pierre and mark kelly, husband of gabby giffords. "state of the union" at 3:00 with leon panetta and martin dempsey. four-o'clock, "face the nation" roger goodell. the sunday talk shows rearing but he by a public service by the networks. it begins at noon with "meet the press." listen to them all on c-span radio, 90.1 fm in the washington area. 119 on xm satellite radio. you can go online to cspanradio.org. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> i think my experience led me to realize that, yes, i did have a voice. in using it, i could accomplish things. having been crazy -- having been busy raising the children, i do not think up to my mind to anything like that. when i left the white house, there were so many sign people up there who are willing to help you win your cause. i had a big following. >> first lady, influence and image. their public and private life and their influence on the president. produced with the white house historical association. season one begins presidents' day, february 18 at 9:00 eastern and pacific. host: we want to welcome marc ginsberg from new marc who served as a middle east adviser to president carter and ambassador to morocco. thank you for being with us. but the began with some of the news of the weekend and comments made by the vice-president who continues his travels through europe including a conference taking place in munich, germany. he says the u.s. is ready for direct talks directiran if they are ready for negotiations. -- direct talks with iran. guest: this is then try to open a back door and front door negotiations. part of the challenges, we have made these and treaties. the question is whether the i italia is going to avail himself of them. i am in favor of doing everything possible to see what is necessary and to explore the feasibility of avoiding a conflict with iran if iran is ready to reach an accommodation that stops its nuclear weapons program. if it does so in a way that is verifiable. after all, i think the last thing the united states wants to do is to go into another conflict with the wrong. i think it went to test the willingness. so far despite the best intentions ever since he became president, they have rebuffed these efforts. host: there is a limited time. because elections are scheduled for june. what could happen between now and then if anything at all? guest: it is hard to say because just the other day they said they will accelerate the nuclear enrichment program. i know the vice president and the new secretary of state, they would all like to see if they could reach a grand bargain, but so far the evidence on the ground is if not a nuclear weapons threshold, nuclear weapons capability threshold. host: there is this headline based on comments by the vice- president. he tries to deal with damage control following hagel's policy flub. chuck hagel -- how did he perform, and it did the vice president need to amend any fences? guest: there is no doubt -- i really respect and admire senator hagel. we have worked together. i think you saw as many viewers saw, this was the type of grilling that they would not want to go through. if i had been in the hot seat, i would suspect i would be switching as well. while i know senator hagel has done a lot or the past few weeks to alleviate some concerns with many of the senators, i say the confrontation that he had with senators mccain and graham was painful to watch and i feel on called for. i think it was unacceptable to put senator hagel in the position given the fact we are arguing over whether the surge work or did not work at iraq. it almost seems like we are arguing issues that no longer relates to what the circumstances are on the ground today. host: which leads to the headline from "the washington post." yes, we have damaged al qaeda and original stronghold, but it continues to percolate as we see the situation and north africa and the middle east. carving out enclaves that have given previously the gasping organization some new breathing room. guest: there is no doubt the offshoots of al qaeda are on the march once again. they are the cockroaches that do not seem to go away no matter how much to try to swap them. they're still active in yemen. of course, there are still on the border in afghanistan as well. the problem is, in some respects with osama bin laden gone, we still have the number 2 who is working in the shadows. while we have prematurely boasted at times to have cut off a command and control structure, until we are able to understand the connectivity between him and whatever is the remnants of the central organization, you have to ask, what is the underpinning of these new jihadists. i refer to them as the jihdai sand pirates. they're not just driven by some islamic ideology, they are also sand pirates . they attacked the algerian -- have been known in extortion and criminal kidnapping four years and years. have also been able to establish a foothold in the libya as well. it is very disconcerting to see what has taken place. we should not be surprised. host: back and forth on a number of different fronts, but let me go back to the issue of syria. this is a story from "the new york times." a lot of attention on the president's foreign-policy with regard to asia. in europe, a concern we are moving away from a close alliance with the european alliance and more towards asia. your thoughts. guest: the administration has tried to create a branding of new foreign policy, which is the so-called big event to asia. as if some way or another -- the implication is we are by to turn our backs on europe and the middle east and focus on asia and renew alliances because of the growing threats from north korea and the challenges that china has placed on our allies in asia through the confrontations over these gas bespeckled islands in the south china sea. i daresay as interesting as it may sound, and my present -- secretary clinton who made her first trip to asia, i have heard rumors to the effect incoming secretary of state kerry will make its first trip to the middle east. we are going to pivot to asia,. back to the middle east seems to repave it. host: -- repivot. host: u.s. sanctions are proving counterproductive. the economy is in ruins. the countrydeadlocked in the cos heading toward sectarian breakup. the grim prognosis for syria is provided by the latest report provided by the state department working with the free syrian army. guest: i admire him and i know he has been writing quite a bit about him lately. he is symptomatic of the disease that has set into washington, which is a new-found interest in syria. when the revolution began, to find voices of concern over syria was a virtually impossible treasure hunt. we were expressing deep concern than that unless we involve ourselves, when i say involved, i will be careful -- once we did what we could politically to get the disparate opposition groups more organized, the situation would devolve out of control. we are in a situation or our options are in the -- are limited. all of the hand-wringing and chest pounding that the administration and people in the academic community engaged in at this point in time we live the fact that we are at a point lie factere are -- be that the pandora's box opened up in syria is a catastrophe that will affect the region in ways we cannot imagine. host: marc ginsberg is joining us from new york. he was the u.s. ambassador to morocco and former senior adviser to president jimmy carter. the other headline we are following is from reuters. the vice president delivering remarks saying there is a possibility of direct talks with iran. republican senator john mccain telling reuters he would have no objection to direct talks, but questioned how much these with cheese -- would achieve its fundamental questions about the iranian nuclear program are unresolved. [video clip] >> our policy is not containment. it is to prevent iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. we have also made clear that the iranian leaders need not sentence their people to economic isolation. there is still time and space for diplomacy, backed by pressure, to succeed. the ball is in the government of iran's courts. host: if we were able to begin negotiations with iran and its intentions for to ease between the u.s. in iran, which became a huge problem to present jimmy carter in 1979 with the hostage situation, if we make progress, how would that use the entire neighborhood and countries around iran and afghanistan? guest: it depends on how the israelis interpret this. the israelis believe they have more to fear about iran's nuclear capabilities and the rest of the name of the. i have read -- than the rest of the neighborhood. i have read the papers. job one for netanyahu will be refocusing on iran. how do determine what red wine there is in iran's nuclear capabilities? all the talk about reaching out to iran may be academic if israel feels the u.s. is not in lockstep with them in determining what the threshold is. if an agreement is reached -- the last thing i want to see is a conflict with iran if it can be avoided. it would help alleviate the deepest concerns that iran has about american intentions. let's be clear. iran is a statesponsor of terror that continues to support beshear alice i would use weapons and revolutionary guards the-president assad in syria -- president assad in syria and they are the sibylline -- destabilizing our allies. we have to be mindful that the iranians may use that to create mischief in the region while they think they have the united states at bay. host: he served in the middle east policy institute. there is this from joseph ramirez. what do the iranian people think of americans? guest: it is iran the that ironic that the vast majority of iranian people -- it is ironic that the vast majority of the iranian people are pro- american. they are probably the most pro- west people in the region in terms of wanting to accommodate a bilateral relationship with the united states. all you have to do is go back to the previous election, which the a -- the ayatollah's forces crushed with ruthless tenacity. the iranian people want to be free of the military dictatorship that is ruling them right now. host: we welcome our listeners on c-span radio. our guest is ambassador marc ginsberg. jack is joining us from florida. caller: good morning to you and good morning to you, ambassador ginsberg. i think you are a great american. what i see with the iranian and israeli conflict is the iranians do not want israel to be on the planet. we have a president and a vice president who have said many times and have walked away from the israelis when they have visited here in the united states. the president we have in the white house right now is anti- jewish. you see it and we see it. to have somebody like that representing the united states and is supposedly a friend of israel to side with all of these radicals -- host: thank you and we will stop it there. marc ginsberg, your response? guest: let me try to parse the best out. there is a dysfunctionality between the two leaders of the united states and israel. benjamin netanyahu and brought in, -- and barack obama do not get along with each other. that has caused disconcerted unhappiness on both sides of the atlantic. the israelis are deeply disappointed. that is the reason for the election outcome you see in israel. the prime minister will probably remain prime minister. there are a lot of israelis who do not want to see this bilateral relationship undermine further. i have told many jewish audiences around the country that despite the personal relationships of these two individuals, the president has been consistent in maintaining the military and intelligence support for israel throughout these difficulties. i have consistently commanded the obama administration for not letting politics get in the way of what is the essential rubric of the u.s.-israeli ire of our relationship, which is the military strategic support that be -- bilateral relationship, which is the military support that is provided. my friends in the administration have done everything they could to ensure politics do not get into the way of that relationship. host: this is from one of our other viewers following up on your earlier point about how the iranian people see americans. my father was from iran and we always wanted better relations with the u.s. that's me bring it back to the elections that will take place in june -- let me bring in that to the elections that will take place in june. what will take place? guest: i'm afraid very little. mahmoud ahmadinejad has a total breach with the people around him over domestic and foreign policy. there is no doubt that the economics sanctions have undermined the iranian economy. that has caused great hardship among the iranian heart -- iranian people. the sanctions are meant to change behavior, not punish the iranian people. so far, the iranians have not evidence that these sanctions have changed. the revolutionary guard and the ayatollah will continue to be the sole auditors -- arbiters the iranian foreign policy. in iran, the ayatollah has the final word on national security regardless of who is elected president. host: focusing on out coming -- outgoing secretary of state hillary clinton. john kerry will officially stepped in tomorrow. the story is pointing out that she leaves the state department with the simplest of yardsticks to measure her. traveling nearly 1 million miles. 401 days on the road. she expanded the state department agenda to gender violence and the use of social media in diplomacy. from your standpoint, what is her legacy as the secretary of state? guest: "the new york times articles on to it up well. she clearly reestablished american diplomacy around the world. she was tireless as a person who traveled around the world, as everyone knows. the mileage that was significant if not overly intense for her. she uplifted young people around the world, pursued a policy of what we call soft diplomacy. she tried hard. i know she did, to try to convince the white house that on the hard issues of libya, syria, afghanistan, the middle east, and elsewhere, they should be more readily prepared to engage. the national security council reflecting the president's intentions were perhaps not as ready to follow her lead. that is what is reflected in this article. there were good reasons why the white house staff and the national security staff and the president felt they should involve themselves in syria. the american people were not ready to put the boots on the ground and they are not prepared still to put the boots on the ground. the story has not yet been written over exactly how the relationship between the secretary and her staff and the white house and the staff interactive on all of these policy issues. i am looking forward to the book. host: does she have a lasting legacy? guest: absolutely. the accolades that are accompanying her departure from the american people and around the world give her such a boost. let me be a little bit more specific. there is no doubt that she leaves as one of the most popular secretaries of state in the history of the united states. that is a great accomplishment. that suggests that she accomplished what is most important. she was a tireless ally of the president. she was a real team player. most importantly, she brought good will on behalf of the american people abroad. that is a great accomplishment in her own right. given the legacy that she inherited from the previous demonstration where there was such resentment against the united states around the world. she earns an a1 in terms of diplomacy. as far as the achievements in the hard issues and challenges we face of broad, the record remains to be written. host: there are a lot of factors that go into any decision when it involves the president doing anything publicly. what is your best insight into why the president agreed or at 60 minutes to conduct the interview with him and the secretary of state and the other -- the only other person has appeared with other than his wife. the question is why guest: ? -- guest: is this a signal in case she decides to run in 2016? is this a thank-you for all of the team work she provided to him? they were pretty intense adversaries until he convinced her to serve as secretary of state. i suspect he valued tremendously the advice she provided over the last four years. i think this was a reflection of how much they came to appreciate each other's talents as well as the need for each other and the role she played. let's remember, she was a great team player to this demonstration and to this president. there was hardly a ripple of this agreement that ever emerged between them. at a time in the first term when the president also fallen policy credentials were being questioned, -- president's foreign-policy credentials were being questioned, she provided wind. whether or not anyone wants to see it as an endorsement for a potential run on her behalf, we will leave that to the political pundits. host: charles is on the phone on a republican line. caller: i have enjoyed the show very much. i have spent the last nine years in iraq and afghanistan as a civilian contractor. i am absolutely convinced that the worst thing we can do is to pull out from afghanistan too quickly. we need to see this thing through to at least 2014 and to keep substantial presence in that part of the world. we need to keep materials presuppositions, weapons, artillery, small arms, because some kind of military action against iran is almost a certainty. host: charles, thanks for the call and thanks for putting afghanistan on the table. marc ginsberg? that: isn't it ironic during the chuck hagel confirmation hearing, the word afghanistan hardly came up. there was courage and bravery in afghanistan, particularly in the situation when the state of u.s. policy is to withdraw. i have always believed that in terms of the military efforts on the ground, we have not achieved what we wanted to achieve. if we are going to have a mission, that mission should be to prevent what we always wanted to do, to prevent afghanistan from becoming a country in which it was a failed state, in which al qaeda and terrorist organizations could read boots and take control of the country. -- reboot and take control of the country. the administration policy is to do what we can to train the afghan national forces to develop a buffer zone between the law less provinces to the east of kabul and hope for the best. is that a recipe for security for afghanistan? no, but that is the reality we have right now and that is the decision of the president. i support him. we cannot change the equation at this point in time. the taliban have been determined to relentlessly attacked the afghan government. we have to not pull out and make sure we focus on a counterterrorism strategy compared to the surge strategy, which did not accomplish its goal. host: another word that was not mentioned was the use of drones in the confirmation hearing. guest: this is a controversial subject. i fall on the side of supporting our drone program relentlessly sorting our drone program to protect our troops and to prevent the united states from being harmed by terrorists. when al qaeda operatives were taken out by drones >>> in afghanistan and yemen -- by drone strikes in afghanistan and elsewhere, i commended the president for his counterterrorism policy. it has protected the homeland as best as any weapon we could have. it has been an effective way of putting al qaeda on the defense and keeping them on the run. the president deserves congratulations for being relentlessly consistent and persistent in his drone program. does that mean it has been totally cost free? clearly there have been civilian harmed as a result of some of these drones attacks. that collateral damage is unacceptable and inappropriate. but let's be real. if we did not have a drone program, the homeland would be far more insecure. host: michelle has this point. get out of afghanistan. the russians went broke fighting that war. nothing will ever change there. we underestimate their culture. let's go to doug in boston. caller: the first phrase out of your guests's mouth was the nuclear program. there is no proof of such a program. marc ginsberg is a neo conservative zionist host:. -- host: a response from marc ginsberg. guest: if this individual wants to be educated, he should go to the website of the international atomic agency. if he does not believe that, he will buy the brooklyn bridge. host: is there a thorn policy challenge that the media has not picked up on? what concerns you the most as you survey the world? guest: we underestimate the confrontation and the plight of a potential military confrontation between japan, china, and north korea over its missile program, as well as the territorial claims china has in the south china seas. there is no doubt that these skirmishes have the potential to lead to major conflict on the part of our allies. let's be mindful of the fact that north korea has a missile program that seems to be relentlessly determined to keep aiming missiles at the american homeland. with a nuclear program and improving nuclear capability, that should be of deep concern to the united states. we have watched the north koreans continue this for decades. we almost it used to the fact that north korea is engaged in this conflict. they have a way of creating potential conflict with south korea, which could drive us into a war on the korean peninsula. that would be equally disconcerting. host: the national journal has posted a piece that is available online. why should john kerry 3 climate change as a national security issue. senator kerry compares -- treat climate change as a national security issue. the problem we face with climate change is as dangerous as any potential security issue we can think about. how important is it that the president mention it in his inaugural address? guest: climate change is a national security issue. the agreements around the world try to deal effectively with climate change issues. it is only stoke to a certain extent by how much these countries want to agree on a mission control. anyone seeing the move out of china where people are catching on the air in beijing -- gagging on the air in beijing is in good health of the problem for the chinese themselves. rising wardens could pose dangers -- waters could pose dangers and are the result of melting of polar ice caps. they could pose a danger to our shores. that is a good indication of how climate change could affect the united states in the years to come. i am delighted to see senator kerry and the president will make this an issue in the second term. host: is calling from kansas don -- don is calling from kansas. caller: we have seen a change over time of the power relationship between the u.s. and israel. it is becoming more powerful. we have to wonder if the tail is wagging the dog. we need to deal with some of the problems we have here. israel is an outsized proportion of our budget and egypt in support of that. host: thank you for that call. guest: here is a strategic partnership between israel and the united states. it is the only real democracy in the middle east. israel has provided the united states with a significant amount of cities it intelligence that is helping the united states. there is an interesting report that i suggest the gentleman read issued by the washington institute for near east policy on the role that israel has played in enhancing american security. to a certain extent, for a small country like israel, israel has provided an outsized proportion of return of support for the united states in terms of the type of technology and military intelligence that has helped the united states. we should not just look at this as a one-way street. the israelis also understand the obligation of helping their american allies. host: this morning, the washington post reflecting on the tenure anniversary of: ofl's -- 10 year anniversary testimony.l's in george w. bush's book, he described the presentation as exhaustive. later, many of the assertions would prove to be inaccurate. at the time, his words reflected the considered judgment and intelligence of the cia at home and around the world. if you look back at what he said 10 years ago, what are the lessons for american foreign policy? guest: i can tell you that the lesson for me was that i made a terrible mistake of believing that speech. of all of the people in the administration, i never believed colin paulo would misrepresent the facts and lead them to believe we should support the argument he laid out. it was the predominant reason why someone like me, who had less inclination to believe anything that dick cheney or george bush had to say about iraq cows i said paul -- iraq, i said powell would never mislead us. i hold him accountable for believing -- convincing people that we should fall in line. it was erroneous and did not have the underpinning of anything that resembled the accurate information that would have just applied -- justify the speech in the first place. host: we are talking with marc ginsberg in new york. we have a call from mississippi. caller: i am proud of our president. he is a thinking man. we cannot go and start conflict and war everywhere. if we are in north korea, which they pose as much of a threat as iran, in my opinion because they constantly threaten us. we say that we are strong and that we present all of the different threats. we do not push back on them nearly as much. israel is our ally and we have to support them. but the united states is the united states of america. we have to look out for our own interests. if we get into all of these conflicts, it weakens us as a country. we have to be careful. we have to go in with both eyes open before we evolved ourselves in one conflict behind the other. -- involve ourselves in one conflict behind the other. we have to be diligent with our resources. our resources on the most important and valuable. guest: i cannot agree more with the statement you just may, ma'am. there is no doubt that the american people are fatigue with the wars in iraq and afghanistan. there are enormous consequences between a military conflict between united states and iran. some people say less just bomb the nuclear facilities and that will be the end of it -- let's just bomb the nuclear facilities and that will be the end of it. the american people deserve to understand more coherently and why that conflict is essential for american security, not only to defend our allies, but to defend the united states. i have been in war games where we have spent time trying to understand the consequences of a military showdown between iran and the united states. they are enormous and important for us to keep in mind. the biggest concern is that it is not just an israeli attack on iran pose a military installations that will be done 'sth iran's military -- iran military installations that will be done with the iranian military. it is firing military rockets against population centers as a retaliatory attack. that will have enormous consequences as well. we have to have our eyes wide open to do what we can to avoid the conflict and to be mindful of the fact that iran with a nuclear weapon, a proven nuclear weapon, or to the point where they are assembling a nuclear weapon, has enormous consequences for the american security and security of the world. it will have an enormous consequence on american interests throughout the world and in the middle east. host: ken is joining us from florida. caller: israel received rockets. not one is really left in gaza. they received rockets and kidnappings from hamas. the media seems to indicate that netanyahu is the intransigent one. how do you make peace wiith abbas -- abbas? you are going to get rockets from the west bank if you make peace with one. guest: you put the nail on the head when you talked about how important it is to have a two state solution to avoid the capacity of hamas to influence all of the west bank to become more radicalized. i have been a passionate believer in a two state solution all my life. watching the possibility of that two state solution evaporates is of deep concern to me. i agree with you. hezbollah has armed itself to the teeth. they have 60,000 missiles aimed at israel. in 2006, it only had 15,000. hamas is dedicated to israel's destruction. there is a significant palestinian secular population that would like to reach some accommodation with israel. i agree with you that the palestinian leadership has not done what is necessary to reach an accommodation. at the same time, i am critical of the israeli governments's policies to create new settlements on the ground. the more that is real bill solomon's, it only on them -- israel build settlements, it only undermines the chance for a two state solution. it appe
FOX News
Jan 28, 2013 8:00pm EST
concentrate on it during the foreign policy debate. the truth is the assassination of the ambassador and three other americans by terrorists in libya has not engaged in the american people. president hillary clinton know that they also know that the national media adores them. and that's a fact. that's the memo. now for the top story tonight, there is no question 60 mince interviews would a big win for president obama and secretary clinton. they got great pr out of it. joining us from washington is senior political analyst brit hume. yesterday i you told chris wallace that you think hillary clinton should not be described as that great secretary of state. why? >> well, first of all, it's no, not easy to be a great secretary of state. foreign policy is a province really of the president. the secretary of state is the person who is his emissary and he is expected to direct the diplomats to carry it out. so that's point one. point 2 is, that she has worked very hard. she has traveled all over the place. set some record, some 112 countries. the list of achievements that can be attributed to
FOX News
Jan 29, 2013 1:00am PST
post game wrap up jie. what is the deal with your morning e-mail? >> it is the funniest e-mail on the web so go to the daily caller and sign up. >> remi, what you got? jay -- >> i am a proud aunt to a nephew born a few weeks ago. it is not as exciting as gavin. >> i have a newborn baby, johnny buffalo mcguinness. it is a little grating on the nerves. he doesn't say much, but he is a wonderful human being and he will get a lot better. o'reilly factor is on. tonight. >> i'm really proud of where we are. >> i think she has been a capable of hard working secretary of state but i think the case for her being a great secretary of state is exceedingly weak. >> bill: what is the truth about hillary clinton's clinton tenure as secretary of state. why did 60 minutes conduct such a soft interview with president obama and secretary clinton last night? we will answer those questions this evening. >> we are losing dramatically the hispanic vote which we think should be ours. >> will republicans support a new immigration ghal is favorable to illegal aliens? we'll discuss it with carl rove, juan williams and mary catherine ham. [shouting] >> give me those. >> bill: a new move to shame americans who are overweight. they say the shaming is health-driven. but is it really? >> cannon ball. >> caution, you where to enter the no spin zone. the factor begins right now. >> bill: hi, i'm bill o'reilly, thanks for watching us tonight. barack obama and hillary clinton friends forever. that is the subject of this evening's talking points memo. disappointing interview on 60 minutes last night. i didn't learn very much. in fact, i didn't learn anything. the theme seemed to be the world is a dangerous and complicated place. >> we also live in a dangerous world. and, you know, the people i'm proud to serve and work with in our diplomatic and development personnel ranks, they know it's a dangerous and risky world. >> it is a dangerous world and that's part of the reason why we have to continue to get better. >> we live not only in a dangerous but an incredibly complicated world right now with many different forces at work. >> bill: summing up, we live in a world that is incredibly complicated and dangerous. good to know. now, i respect "60 minutes" and steve kroft the interviewer. i don't know why he didn't ask hard questions. if you know, please tell me. you don't have to be disrespectful. all you have to say is, hey, mr. president, why did yourselves, who is sitting right next to you, not go on the sunday shows to explain what happened in benghazi libya? why did you send the u.n. ambassador to do that when susan rice obviously didn't know anything about it? that's respectful question. is it not? >> here is another one. mrs. clinton, when did you learn about the assassination of libyan ambassador christopher stephens and why didn't you hold a press conference when the intelligence community told you it was a terrorist attack? not a complicated question. is it? just those two questions could have enlightened the american public about the libyan disaster. but you know what? i don't think steve kroft even cares about libya. and most other national media don't care either. so the bottom line is we the people are not going to be told what happened over there. president and secretary clinton are not going to it answer any questions about it. are not going to be forth coming. and we can't make them. it's partially our fault because we the people don't much care either. if we did care, it would have been a big campaign issue. but it wasn't. mitt romney wouldn't even concentrate on it during the foreign policy debate. the truth is the assassination of the ambassador and three other americans by terrorists in libya has not engaged in the american people. president hillary clinton know that they also know that the national media adores them. and that's a fact. that's the memo. now for the top story tonight, there is no question 60 mince interviews would a big win for president obama and secretary clinton. they got great pr out of it. joining us from washington is senior political analyst brit hume. yesterday i you told chris wallace that you think hillary clinton should not be described as that great secretary of state. why? >> well, first of all, it's no, not easy to be a great secretary of state. foreign policy is a province really of the president. the secretary of state is the person who is his emissary and he is expected to direct the diplomats to carry it out. so that's point one. point 2 is, that she has worked very hard. she has traveled all over the place. set some record, some 112 countries. the list of achievements that can be attributed to her is not long and is not major. i mean, how well is the reset with russia worked out which she was very much involved in starting? how are things between arabs and israelis? closer to peace than before? how about iran? north carolina? their nuclear weapons programs. have they been retarded, held back, halted? no, i don't think so. so you look around for a clinton doctrine, has she articulated as kind of a foreign policy intellectual, a new way of thinking, a comprehensive doctrine for foreign policy or doctrine for any particular reason? i would say not. what about major treaties? has she engaged in negotiations that led to the signing of major treaties or any major treaty? the answer to all of those questions appears to be no. these are the kind of things that might put you in the category of a great secretary of state. i'm not saying she hasn't tried hard. she has certainly worked hard. she has behaved with dignity and certain grace. no big blunders blurting out the wrongening in the wrong place. she does her homework but great? i don't think great. >> bill: you left out the arab spring which is developing into a debacle. syria another debacle. why didn't steve croft ask those questions secretary of state and president clinton right there could have done a laundry list of hey, look at this, look at that afghanistan not really going our way now but he didn't ask any of that. >>, he didn't be and i have been trying to put myself in his position, i have done some interviews with presidents over the years. i remember particularly doing one with presidents bush 41 and 43 together. and there was a novelty factor about seeing them there together like that which led me to focus to some extent on their relationship and what role the first president bush had played as an advisor to his son and so forth. there was novelty to this interview. unusual. kroft remarked upon that the whole interview seemed devoted to their relationship. guess what? they have, according to them, a great relationship. >> bill: why is that news worthy? >> i'm not saying it is. i'm saying it's one thing to devote part of an interview to that. it's another to kind of basically turn the whole interview to one or two questions. >> bill: both of us know croft. croft is good, right? he he is good. do you think is he good or -- >> -- i think, no i think steve kroft. i has always admired steve kroft. i will say this if you look back through the history of the interviews he has landed with barack obama. >> he has never been tough on obama. >> never been tough on obama. >> bill: we called the obama people and they still take our calls and they said we didn't put any restrictions on kroft. he could have asked anything. we said he had 30 minutes. he could have asked anything. we didn't tell him don't talk about libya or the arab spring. could have talked about anything. i don't know why. maybe i will run it to steve some place in manhattan and ask him. it was a soft interview. we didn't really learn anything other than the world is a complingted and dangerous place. did you know that before, human? did you know the war was a complicated and dangerous place? >> yeah. i kind of thought that. >> so we knew all of that. we learned it again which might have been instructive. we got nothing out of that and then, you had hillary clinton standing there. believe me. i think greta has got him. maybe greta -- i don't know. >> brit: greta has her. she is in a tough situation. she only has 12 minutes. >> bill: give me 12 minutes with her hume. i will take 12 minutes with the secretary. do you know what i'm talking about? we have colin powell here tomorrow night. wait until you see, this hume. >> i look forward to it. >> bill: it's a matter of budgeting your time. as your mom told you you have to budget. you can't be from it terring it away with questions like oh, are you guys mad of each other or what? >> who cares? [ laughter ] hume, do you want to take the last word? or you have had enough of me. >> i would say it's always a little difficult to do an interview with the president in that this sense courtesy that other officials including former secretaries of state for example but even. >> bill: i will get new a moment. >> even with all of that it was a pretty soft interview no way around it. he he is in good company. there have been a the love interviews with this president. >> bill: why is the american press so infatuated with barack obama and hillary clinton? we will try to find that out. later big immigration debated will republicans spearhead reform to try to get on the >> bill: joining us from washington sally quinn. editor of "the washington post" on faith section. judith miller fox news analyst. i understand you just talked to steve kroft, correct? >> i did. >> bill: he said? >> he said the only constraint on that interview, there were no conditions, even though the white house approached him, the only limitation was one of time he said he knew he only had 30 minutes. he could concentrate either on relationship between former rivals and now partners and now admirers on each other or he could concentrate on foreign policy. she had just testified on the hill. spent hours testifying. he didn't think he was going to be able to advance that story so he chose to concentrate on the relationship. >> bill: do you think that was wise decision in hindsight after looking at the interview. >> i'm not interested in their relationship. >> did you know the world was a dangerous place. >> i kind of suspected it was. >> bill: how about you? did you know how dangerous and complicated the world is? >> well, that's not what i came away with. i came away with the question why would he want to do this? and why would he want to do it with hillary? and i think probably part of the reason is that the worst kept secret in washington is that hillary clinton and the state department does not make policy. tom donilin, the national security advisor and his team make the policy. and that hillary literally for four years has gone out around the world, being the face of the united states and representing the president, but it has been. >> bill: pr person you are saying? >> yes, yes. it's been a very frustrating role for her because she is mart and she has a lot of good ideas. >> bill: she was a good soldier and this was the way reto reward her? >> i think that's one reason. i think partly because they wanted to reward her for doing. this partly it was a thank you to bill clinton who really worked hard for the president. >> ms. quinn, that is good inside stuff, and that may well be the president's motivation for him doing it. but steve kroft could have zeroed in on hillary clinton and said what brit hume just said or what i have been saying about benghazi, libya and saying, you know, hey. >> you are not going to learn anything. >> >> bill: believe me, you don't have to learn if you ask the right question and they dodge the question, all right, and the congress people didn't ask the right questions. very simple as i said in talking points memo, ms. quinn, why didn't you go on the sunday shows? what was preventing you from doing that you her in charge, is he your guy. why weren't you out there? come on, i'm a simple man, you know that better than anyone, simple question, answer it. [ laughter ] am i right or wrong here? what? >> i figure very complicated and dangerous man. >> okay. >> very dangerous. >> i'm sure hillary would agree with that i'm complicated and dangerous as well. if you ask the question and she doesn't answer it. you got your answer. she is not going to engage. >> but she did -- >> bill: let's let judy. >> so far so many of the republicans, bill, have been grandstanding. >> bill: they are a bunch of pinheads, we know that but kroft has his big forum for 30 minutes. >> he he just didn't think with the two of them there and the two of them getting to speak that he was going to be able to get an answer out of it. >> bill: are you kidding me? you tried. wouldn't you have tried? you have been a journalist for, what, decades, right? >> i would have tried but so has he. he had to make a judgment call about what his audience wanted to hear. >> all right. i bet you most americans really wanted substance rather than -- rather than the jimmy kimmel show. do you know what i'm talking about, sally? do you know who jimmie is are you guys still mad? hey, hey. come on. we have got a dead ambassador over there. we don't know what the hell happened. >> i totally agree with judy. i mean, and i think steve kroft did exact will the right thing. i thought it was 30 minutes of fascinating television to watch the two of of them together who we know there has been so much tension. >> bill: go on dancing with the stars then. you know? >> hey, bill. >> this is important stuff. >> bill, it's been reported so many times that obamas have never invited the clintons to the white house. and i tried to check this out. and i got wawld by the state department and the white house. so, what does that mean about their friendship? they talk about being warm and close and friendly and all of that. >> go to washington. i know you -- no one cares. the folks don't care. judith, last word, go. >> but, bill, you also said the american people don't care about benghazi. >> not enough. if they cared, we would be getting some answers. >> bill: romney had a big chance too and he didn't take it. >> absolutely. >> bill: all right, ladies, very fascinating. directly ahead will the republicans supreme court immigration reform that will be favorable to illegal aliens? chubby americans. some people actually want to shame them. have a controversial report on that upcom straight talk. look at the last election. we are losing dramatically the hispanic vote, which we think should be ours for a variety of reasons. and we have got to understand that. >> joining us now from washington, mary katharine ham and juan williams. both fox news analyst. juan, i know you want immigration reform. >> i do. what about the 37% of immigrant families and for illegal immigrants the number is 47%. that are some kind of means tested welfare? should that be part of the legislation? because what i'm getting at here is i understand the political strategy. i think everybody does. g.o.p. needs to get more hispanic votes. but if you legalize everybody that's here, and they get more on the welfare entitlement train. which they are now. i don't know if that's good for the nation juan. >> you know, look, i agree with you about welfare and fraud. i mean, seems to me we have an issue with fraud of any kind. we need to eliminate it let me just say i think you are framing this question completely wrong, bill. i think that in fact, immigrants generate economic activity. they hype g.d.p. he hype consumer spending. immigrants create jobs i think like 18% of small american business owners are immigrant. when you get to about 16% of the population is immigrant. about a third of our edge fleers, of our scientists our doctors. >> bill: that's all correct. immigrants drive achievement in america and always have. i don't think any sane people disagree with that you are overlooking this enormous and it is enormous. 47% of illegal immigrants receive means tested taxed one out oof two. >> they are tough eligibility requirements. >> one out of two, juan. that's the stat. >> let me just say, in addition to which, immigrants pay taxes and oftentimes are not eligible. >> bill: juan, it's one out of two. you see what you are adding here? all right. mary katharine, how do you see it? >> well, i think you could hard that in this case if those immigrants who are illegal and on welfare got the became legal or had some sort of legal status that perhaps they would be paid higher wages and that was a problem that would maybe work on itself. as far as the political situation goes here. i don't think this is a magic pill for republicans and i don't think a lot of them are fooling themselves into thinking that i think it is a platform from which you could have this discussion. as far as obama manhattanning to pass it i'm a little curious about that for four years he didn't raise a finger on this. in 2007 he actually helped tornado tore torpedo that -- >> doesn't have to run again. 66% of americans, two thirds, all right? support a pathway to citizenship. >> yes. >> 66%. 17% say send the illegals back home. 13% want to aguest worker program for them. so any president. any sitting president. particularly a liberal guy is going to say all right, i'm going to get on this train and i'm going to drive the train and then john mccain is saying -- >> -- john mccain is no liberal. >> bill: no, but he is doing it for political reasons, juan. i don't know if he is doing it for the good much the country. >> wait a minute. hold on. stop this train. don't forget that this was blocked under president bush, president bush a republican. >> president obama voted for a the poison pill. >> just a second. it was blocked by the far right. >> and the far left and unions and barack obama. >> absolutely demonized every immigrant as some kind of threat to america. >> the attack came from both flanks. and the attack also come from both flanks again. >> bill: let me be the source of light here instead of heat for once. it's a different time then, juan. we had very big border security problems then. and now the border security is a lot better. so the debate in the story can progress. i think we need immigration reform. but i do think that they have to deal with the welfare situation. because if you are going to add another 6 million people, and, believe me, when welfare gets -- when welfare, when immigration reform gets passed, that means the people in the other countries are going to be able to come here. you have a flood of new immigrants into the united states. not just the 12 million that are here, but probably another 12 to 15 that will join them. you have got to deal with this problem. i don't think either party will do it but that's where i'm coming from. >> i think your conservative friends are going to make sure that, in fact, people who overstay their visas, which is is about 40% of the illegal population right now, that that stops. they are going to have really tough exit requirements to make sure those people leave. >> i hope so. >> get 12 million more. go ahead. >> i think the fact that rubio and jeff flake and some and mccain are at the top of this and sort of pushing it forward, in fact, before the president is, with a fairly detailed set of principles is a sign that perhaps you can get parts of the right on board. you do have to worry about parts of the left defecting including labor unions who voted against in 2007. but, let me say there is. >> bill: i have got to go here. [talking at the same time] >> there is reason for concern. >> bill: you guys can continue on your own. all right. we will watch the commercial and then there is is plenty more ahead as the factor moves along this evening. karl rove will weigh in on the deal and the "60 minutes" interview tonight. adam carolla on shaming overweight people and carolla's experience on "dancing with the stars." there he is whoa. i hope you stay tuned for those reports. >> bill: liberal man, forced behind the global warming movement. well, mr. turner has a son. 49-year-old teddy turner who is running for congress in south carolina. >> a graduate of the sit del. husband and father of three, today turner is an economics teacher in charleston. turner will fight for more freedom and less government. so our families will have a secure tomorrow. conservative teddy turner for congress. >> bill: what! conservative teddy turner? he joins us now from charleston. are you kidding me? how did you get to be a conservative with such a liberal father? >> my dad asks me that all the time, bill, i tell you four years of military college at the sit del and two years in the soviet union, if that doesn't make you a conservative nothing will. and watching a little bit of fox nothing will, either. when you were raised your father ted turner, he wasn't as liberal as he is now, i understand. correct? >> no, my dad was pretty tough. he did 8 years of military school. he was in the coast guard. we had -- there was no sleeping in on the weekends. we did white glove inspections. dad was tough. he made us work hard. learn the value of a dollar, all the things that our dads should be doing today. >> >> bill: did he discuss politics with you when you were growing up? >> oh, absolutely. our dinner conversations were pretty incredible. i mean, he was involved with all indz of things. and he never -- we didn't get much into the baseball and little league and that and i could've stuff. we were always talking about pretty heavy issues. >> was he then a liberal man? was he -- you know, did he support the liberal side when you were a kid? >> no. he didn't. he mid -- met my mother at a young republican's convention. he was very -- he was a small business guy and before he became a big business guy. but he was very conservative. this change in life has been later on, mainly started within environmentalism. >> now you talk to him, i would assume, you are running for congress. we he vote for you if he lived in your south carolina district? would he vote for you because you are billing yourself as a conservative small government guy, we vote for you? >> well, i'm not billing myself as conservative. i'm extremely conservative. but i think he would. i spent a lot of time with him in the last couple of weeks and talking about issues. everything we discussed he agreed with me. we are not that far and it wasn't because he was agrees talking i'm his son-in-law. he is agreeing because it's common sense. is he liberal in certain issues. but really he wants a better world like most of us. but, we don't agree on a lot of politics. >> all right. so, you guys are, when you talk, man-to-man, you don't have a big fischer. but i'm sure he voted for barack obama. you are not going to vote for barack obama. now, the global warming is his big deal, the environmental stuff. dodo you believe in global warming? do you think it's been caused by carbons and we are the responsibility for this? >> well, when he drives the prius to the challenger, you know, you have got to question a little bit. but, you know, what i believe in is clean air and clean water and a future for our kids. i don't believe that my ford f-250 is causing global warming. i might get a lot of flack for that but, you know, we can't tax ourselves by going in with things like the deoat that protocol and that kind of stuff. so no, i'm not a believer but i want to make sure that we're still doing the right thing going forward. i just don't like scaring kids and telling them we are cook pg ourself. >> you want clean water and clean air but you are not buying into the fact that the human population has depleted the ozone and that's why it's getting warmer. you said something very interesting there you said your father drives the prius to the challenger. which is a private jet. do you want to expound on that a little bit? >> well, you know, his take is, he owns a lot of trees so his carbon footprint is pretty minimal. >> bill: that sounds like a rationalization to me. [ laughter ] >> well, it may be that it's like catholic indulgences are well in mitigation. we can say a lot of the things. when it comes right down to it, we need to have clean air and clean water but we can't restrict our business because that's the only way we are going to get out of this deficit mess. >> bill: all right. your father helping you finance your campaign? >> well, is he has written me te $2,500 check like a lot of people have and i think that's all i'm going to get. >> bill: very interesting story and we appreciate you coming on tonight. when we come right back, karl rove on immigration and 60 mince interview with president obama and secretary clinton. rove is next. [ female announcer ] going to sleep may be easy, but when you wake up in the middle of the night it can be frustrating. it's hard to turn off and go back to sleep. intermezzo is the first and only prescription sleep aid approved for use as needed in the middle of the night when you can't get back to sleep. it's an effective sleep medicine you don't take before bedtime. take it in bed only when you need it and have at least four hours left for sleep. do not take intermezzo if you have had an allergic reaction to drugs containing zolpidem, such as ambien. allergic reactions such as shortness of breath or swelling of your tongue or throat may occur and may be fatal. intermezzo should not be taken if you have taken another sleep medicine at bedtime or in the middle of the night or drank alcohol that day. do not drive or operate machinery until at least 4 hours after taking intermezzo and you're fully awake. driving, eating, or engaging in other activities while not fully awake without remembering the event the next day have been reported. abnormal behaviors may include aggressiveness, agitation, hallucinations, or confusion. alcohol or taking other medicines that make you sleepy maincrease these risks. in depressed patients, worsening of depression, including risk of suicide, may occur. intermezzo, like most sleep medicines, has some risk of dependency. common side fects are headache, nausea, and fatigue. so if you suffer from middle-of-the-night insomnia, ask your docto about intermezzo and return to sleep again. ♪ >> bill: thanks for staying with us. i'm bill o'reilly in the impact segment tonight. as we discussed at the top of the program, immigration reform coming up quickly. will republicans support it? and the 60 minutes interview last night with the president and the secretary of state joining us from austin, texas, fox news analyst karl rove. let's take immigration first. what is your advice to republicans on that? >> well, i think marco rubio laid out an excellent set of principles that looks like many of them, most of them have been embodied in this bipartisan 8-member senate panel republicans ought to give it a we clear strong look as you saw from your interview with marco unionio recently it emphasizes strong border security. a guest worker program and a fair but tough resolution of the issue of the people here already illegally. >> bill: generally speaking, i had no beef with senator rubio's plan and i hope they get something together. they are aren't as i addressed with juan williams and mary katharine ham. really coming to gripsz with one of the severe problems. you are going to have a lot of new americans here. you are going to have 12 million here and they are going to bring in another 12 to 15. we are talking 20 to 25 million. basically invested in this country. half of the illegal aliens now as i said, receiving means entitlement. how are they going to deal with this? >> well, first of all, we're not bringing in 12 and then bringing in another 12. as marco explained to you and as the panel apparently has endorsed today, the concept is if you are here illegally you can surface, can you get a card that allows you to stay in the country and work. but if you want citizenship, you have to go to the back of the line, which means that you won't get your green card for. >> bill: won't stop people from coming here to visit their mom and dad and all of that? >> that's right. that's right. but, the other part of it is you cannot get citizenship for between 12 to 15 years and then and only then can you use this principle of family reunification to try to bring people in. you will notice, also, rubio talked about and the panel today talked about mitigating that issue by putting greater emphasis on allowing people to come here because they have skills, not just because of family. the devil is in the details. that's right. they have to address the welfare thing somehow. >> that was the other interesting thing. rubio talked about and it looks like tentatively this panel has embraced the idea if a if you are one of the people here ill ely and you surface, you can continue to work but you do not get access to government benefits like obama care. >> bill: that would be interesting. >> how many benefits are denied you? because if you say okay we will allow your kid to get a free lunch if you are poor but we are not going to let you go on welfare or this, or this or this or that i think it might expand the amount of people support immigration reform and the magnet of drawing people here for the benefits. >> bill: crux of the matter with liberals saying look how mean they are to the poor and hispanic. look how mean mean mean mean. you know that's going to happen. bobby jindal governor of louisiana. roll the tape. >> we have got to stop being the stupid party. i'm serious. it's time for a new republican party that talks like adults. time for us to articulate our plans and visions for america in real terms. it's no secret we had a number of republicans that damaged the brains this year with offensive and bizarre comments. i'm here to say we have had enough of that. >> all right, we have got to stop being the stupid party and you say? >> i think he is right. he was talking about todd aiken of missouri and richard murdock of indiana and their terrible comments on abortion. i think he is right. this formulation actually has been offered before by daniel patrick moynahan who wrote a famous essay in the 1970s talking about the democratic party being the stupid party and the republican party gaining asen desi. jindal understands that and paul ryan and marco rubio and mitch daniels and scott walker all of whom have been emphasizing the same theme in recent weeks. they are on target. the republican party can't be in mindless opposition to barack obama. it has to offer a visitation future that is attractive and compelling to americans to associate with. >> bill: that means i think what you are saying is have to come to the center a little bit more. not on the far right. >> no, what -- look, it needs to be smart. which means it doesn't need to go out and say stupid things like todd akin did. throwing away a senate seat that we should have otherwise h look, it says explain what you are for. and be for something. we are a growth and opportunity party. we believe in limited government. and cutting the deficit and restraining spending because we know that that thereby increases the opportunity to spread prosperity more broadly and for everybody who wants to work hard and set a dream and set a course to achieve their dream. we need to talk about what it is that we want to do for america, not simply what we want to stop president obama from doing. >> bill: you watched the 60 mince thing last night? >> yes. i read -- i saw the tape of it and then i read carefully the transcript. and i mean, talk about powder puff journalism. that was it. >> what would you have done had you been steve kroft? well, i would have had some tough questions. or i would have -- look, most of this was just sort of, you know, do you like each other? how long is that endorsement going to last? at least he should have picked up on some of the things that both secretary clinton and president obama said that would have been interesting. for example, president obama said at one point when he he was puffing up about his leadership he said when it comes to egypt, had it not been for the leadership we showed, you might have seen a different outcome there. well, steve kroft should have said well, mr. president, what we got because of your leadership is a government led by the muslim brotherhood. is what your leadership -- is that the best outcome that we could expect there? but instead he let comment like that go by. maybe the irony was lost on him. kroft can be if he wants to be a tough interrogator was on, you know, high school, you know, puff journalism last night. >> bill: i don't know if it was high school. kroft is a professional but he clearly made a decision and so did the 60 mince brass which i think is the best in the business. they made a decision to do a soft, kind of dating game kind of thing rather than. >> look, they didn't need to be a mike wallace doing that the late mike wallace. >> i couldn't imagine chris wallace doing it. this was a very interesting moment. he didn't make the most of it. steve kroft didn't. president obama and secretary clinton made the most of it, which was to sort of congratulate each other and look happy. that's all they needed to do and that's all they had to do. >> i want you to watch the interview that i do with party.powell because it's all it's about you, your guys. that's tomorrow. and then we will have you back and you can discuss that interview. okay? >> you bet. >> bill: all right, mr. rove. on deck mr. carolla and chubby americans. some feel we should scorn them. carolla moments away. >> bill: back of the book segment tonight. rolling with carolla. lots to talk about. bring in our pal adam from los angeles. carolla, a guy named daniel callahan a bioeth tis wants to put social pressure on chubby americans there is the doctor. he wants to shame them so they will be healthier. you buying it? you say, what? >> >> i say good. that's all we have. that's all we have ever had is as a society. there is not enough counselors or dietitians or cops. we have to shame. i would like to expand the shaming to welfare moms and deadbeat dads and people who think it's a good idea to fly and flip flops. i want shaming. it keeps society in order. >> bill: but, let's take it one by one. i think deadbeat dads absolutely. that -- their pictures should be put in the paper, all right? all right? mothers who who are irresponsible maybe a little bit different. but i get your point. but an american who is overweight could have a health issue, all right? there is a lot of heredity involved with that. all of that. and it's a personal choice basically to look the way you want. expects exercising, pardon the fun, freedom not to exercise or whatever it may be. should they be scorned for that? >> well, listen, i think they are going to get beat up by society no matter what. i mean, prom season is not great when you're fat. and dating is tough. and even job interviews. i mean, they definitely, society gets its pound of flesh out of these people, in this case it's pound of blubber. so life is not good. eventually when there is more of them than there are of us. they will literally crush us. this way, if you think about it. >> bill: no. i'm not buying it carolla. they are not going to crush us. >> all right. they are going to take over othe world with their enormity. >> bill: twilight zone episode where the people owho don't look so good are running the show and the pretty people. >> all right. >> bill: i got it. super bowl, are you part of this? are you part of the super bowl mania thing? >> i love football. i always played football. as a matter of fact, when i played pop warner football, they would line everybody up on defense. hold the ball out. and yell don't go until you see the ball move. and then they would yell hut and if one guy went forward. we all ran a lap because of higgins staller because he wasn't watching the ball and he was shamed and he did not do it again. >> bill: so finally. >> that shame working in football. >> bill: revenge on a kid named higg enthat youthaller. waiting for this 40 years. >> i like football. i don't like the super bowl parties because people who don't like football show up, block the tv set and they ask stupid questions like which team is the purple team and all i want to say to you people is i don't go to your tony's party and screw it up for you like which one is ms. saigon? i'm confused. all right now very few people know this. i didn't know it. but that carolla did appear on dancing with stars the television program. recently lindsay lohan lindsay lohan turned down a half million bucks to be on ha show but you did it 7.50? didn't they pay you 8 bucks an hour? what did you get. >> i got whatever minimum wage is in california. i think it was 7.50 at the time. plus meals. >> bill: take a look at him on the program. >> i used to do a little amateur boxing and then i used to teach boxing back in the day. i kind of have the foot work part down. but a little bit of rhythm. it's my essence. it's my muse. it's my therapy and it's christmas, santa and the easter bunny all rolled up into one i am dance. >> bill: is it true that your partner renounced her american citizenship right after that? is that true? >> yes. she moved with what's his name out of france. >> bill: right. >> the other fat guy. dave purdue. go shamed garrard. >> bill: was that fun "dancing with the stars"? was that worthwhile for you? >> no. no. this is for the five kids that watch this show. it wasn't fun. it was scary. and it was a great experience and the only reason i did it is because it was scary. i have a policy which is if it's scary, it must be a growth experience unless it involves a bear in which case i'm not going to do it. if it sounds scary, do it. >> i have never seen zorro on a motorcycle but you really made him come alive. factor tip of the day. how to interview president obama should you run into him? the tip 60 seconds away. >> factor tip of the day in a moment on interviewing president obama. first, action on billoreilly.com. we're giving away copies of the constitution and declaration of independence. and the books remain big best sellers and kids' book, lincoln's last days, a good book for any your chin. killing lincoln in february. and watch 60 minutes can't wait for your talking points about the interview and usually fair to all. trying to be fair so you and every other american gets a fair story. and from washington, shockingly disappointing interview. rick from la canada, california, mike wallace, and seattle, you and bernie goldberg criticized the media and hillary clinton's testimony before congress and tell that hillary mopped the floor with the questioners and he came away with more resuspect for her lawyerly brilliance. brian do you not see the difference between peter's mocking the senator's with a compliment to hillary? and the national media fawning over mrs. clinton? do you see the difference there? fanny evans, kansas
PBS
Jan 25, 2013 6:00pm PST
. >> holman: president obama chose his long-time foreign policy advisor denis mcdonough to be the new white house chief of staff. mr. obama made the announcement this afternoon. he lauded mcdonough, and told him, "i know you'll always give it to me straight, as only a friend can." mcdonough will take over from jack lew, who's been nominated to replace timothy geithner as the next treasury secretary. today was geithner's last day, after four years on the job. in a final interview, he said he's hopeful the economy will strengthen this year. the defense department has begun eliminating the jobs of all 46,000 temporary civilian employees at the pentagon. the announcement today said it's a response to mandatory, across- the-board spending cuts. they're scheduled to take effect march 1, unless congress comes up with alternative cuts. without changes, hundreds of thousands of full-time civilian employees will face furloughs and reduced paychecks by april. the government of syria called today for thousands of refugees to come home, including those opposed to the regime. nearly 600,000 syrians have
PBS
Jan 25, 2013 5:30pm PST
captioning sponsored by macneil/lehrer productions >> brown: a federal court ruled president obama's appointments to the national labor relations board made during a congressional recess were unconstitutional. good evening. i'm jeffrey brown. >> sreenivasan: and i'm hari sreenivasan. on the newshour tonight, we get the latest on the decision and the reaction from the white house. >> brown: then, we hear from two of our newshour colleagues on the road: margaret warner reports from jerusalem on moves in israel to form a new coalition government. >> sreenivasan: and ray suarez updates the high-powered meetings of heads of state, business leaders, and others at the world economic forum in davos, switzerland. >> brown: from mali, lindsey hilsum looks at tensions caused by government troops as they advance into islamist territory. >> sreenivasan: spencer michels has a story about trash and one city's crusade to eliminate all of it. >> reporter: san francisco boasts that it recycles 80% of all garbage, and is aiming for zero waste. but some skeptics don' believe it. >> brown: plus, mark shields and david brooks analyze the week's news. that's all ahead on tonight's newshour. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: >> bnsf railway. >> support also comes from carnegie corporation of new york, a foundation created to do what andrew carnegie called "real and permanent good." celebrating 100 years of philanthropy at carnee.org. >> and with the ongoing support of these institutions and foundations. and friends of the newshour. and... >> this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. >> sreenivasan: a federal appeals court rejected several recess appointments made by president oba last year, saying the moves were unconstitutional. the president appointed three people to the national labor relations board last january. the president argued he was justified in doing so because the senate was away for a 20-day break. but republicans and business groups said the senate was still technically in session, if only for a few minutes every few days. the panel of three judges-- all appointed by republican presidents-- said mr. obama had done an inappropriate end-run around the senate. but white house spokesman jay carney took issue with the ruling. >> e decision is novel and unprecedented. it contradicts 150 years of practice by democratic and republican administrations. so we respectfully but strongly disagree with the rulings. accord together congressional research service something like 280 plus intrasession recess appointments by, again, democratting and republican administrations dating back to 1867. >> sreenivasan: if the decision stands, it could invalidate hundreds of decisions made by the labor board. moreover, the body would not have enough members to issue decisions, effectively shutting it down. the ruling also could spell trouble for richard cordray, the head of the consumer financial protection board. he was not part of this legal case, but he was appointed in the same manner on the same day. for more on all this, we turn to steven greenhouse of "the new york times." nice to be here. >> steven, just back us up a little bit. what are some of these decisions why are 9 decisions from the national labor relations board so congressional? >> employers and unions see the national labor relations board as extremely important because there are often fights between the two about whether the union broke the law during a strike, whether the employer broke the law during a unionization, andnow the labor board has really gotten very involved in setting rules for employer os on social media, when can employers tell their employees what they can do in social media and what they can't. and basically the effect of today ruling would nullify a lot of watching what nlb has done over the past year if the supreme court upholds it. >> so what were the problems that the judges in the district court have? >> the judges-- the judges said that the recess, the recess appoint oments by president obama last january were illegal. the president said that the senate was actually out for a break. and that he was allowed to make these ress appointments. the senate said, the republicans in the senate said it was not a real break. that they were continuing to have pro forma sessions and they maintained it was illegal for the president to make these appointments. and today the three judge panel ruled that the president recess appointments during intrasessions were illegal. the court really said today that the president essentially can only make recess appointments once every two years between each congressional session. between each conessional sessio you kw after a two year congressional session ends and right before the next one begins, so this would greatly weaken a president's recess appointment powers. >> as jim carney was mentioning earlier in that sound bite, he said this has been practiced and precedent for a long time. so is the likelihood that this particular rule cog have an effect on all sorts of presidential appointments going forward? >> absolutely. some people pointed out that many federal judges are sitting on the bench now thanks to their reaes-- recess appoiments. and as a rult todas ruli of the three judge panel of the federal appeals court and the district of columbia, those judges appointments could be nullified. and there are prisoners sitting if prison nowadays thinking wait t this is good news. maybe my conviction, maybe my sentencing can be overturned because the judge who ordered my sentence was a recess appointment. >> so considering the magnitude of all this, the supreme court likely to take it up? >> i think so, hari. it's not absolutely clear but because this decision has so much import and because it's the same question being heard now by several different circuit courts and thus there is a likelihood, a good chance there might be a conflict between the circuits, i think it points strongly to the supreme court hearing this case some day. and meanwhile, the labor board might really be in limbo for a year or two or three until the supreme court issues a decision. >> so let's talk for a second about richard corddry. he was confirmed in the same manner on the same day as these members in the national labor relations board is there a likelihood that he will be affected by this as well? >> yes and no, it'snclr. so yesterday president obama renominated mr. corddry for full term. and when de that two years ago, originally congress basically signaled the republicans in the senate signaled we are not going to confirm mr. corddry, so the president did this recess appointment. now it's unclear whether the republicans are going to allow its confirmation of corddry to go through. and you know, obama might have to really try to twist the arms of senate republicans. but that's not very easy. and probablywould not be able to anoer recess appoint oment of corddry because according to this decision, it's not the end of session for congress. >> so could this tie the administration down for a long time? >> i think the effect of this decision is that it might really tie the hands of this president and perhaps a future president. president to make recess appointments except that one window between congresses. and it really greatly increases the wore of t senate to-- in ways block, you know, block appointments to tell president that an unless you deliver up an appointee, a nominee of someone that we can digest that we really like, someone that is much more moderate, we're not going to let this go through. >> we should mention that this isn't happening in a vacuum there are layers and lay ares of politics involved in all this as well, right? >> there is tons of politics. the obama administration has been saying that we really need this power of recess appointments because over the past 2 3, 4, 5, yrs, congress has gotten, the republicans in congress have gotten far more partisan. they've gotten much, much more aggressive about preventing confirmation of nlrb appointees and of judicial appointees. and i'm sure that many in the obama administration are really tremendously up set by this decision because it really might seriously block their ability to name the people that they feel under the constitution they have the right to nominate. >> all right, steven greenhouse o the ew yrk times," thanks so much for joining us. >> nice to be here. >> brown: coming up-- location reports from two newshour correspondents: margaret warner in jerusalem, and ray suarez in davos, switzerland. plus, the advances against islamist rebels in mali; zero waste in san francisco; and shields and brooks. but first, the other news of the day. here's kwame holman. >> holman: president obama chose his long-time foreign policy advisor denis mcdonough to be the new white house chief of staff. mr. obama made the announcement this afternoon. he lauded mcdonough, and told him, "i know you'll always give it to me straight, as only a riencan. mcdonough will take over from jack lew, who's been nominated to replace timothy geithner as the next treasury secretary. today was geithner's last day, after four years on the job. in a final interview, he said he's hopeful the economy will strengthen this year. the defense department has begun eliminating the jobs of all 46,000 temporary civilian employees at the pentagon. the announcement today said it's a response to mandatory, across- the-board spending cuts. they're scheduled to take effect march 1, unless congress comes up with aernative cuts. without changes, hundreds of thousands of full-time civilian employees will face furloughs and reduced paychecks by april. the government of syria called today for thousands of refugees to come home, including those opposed to the regime. nearly 600,000 syrians have fled the civil war and gone to neighboring countries. there's been a new surge this week. we have a report narrated by alex thomson of independent television news. >> the children say they double-checked their figures. they counted around 10,000 children in the overcrowded camps in jordan in just the past 24 hours, with the parents or gardens they recognized around 20,000 people in all. with the winter cold and conditions like this, in the camps, king abdullah of jordan took the might of these people to the top today, to the world economic summit in davous. >> jordan is hosting almost 300,000. the weakest ref gos are struggling now just to survive this year's harsh winter. more international support is desperately needed. and it's only going to get worse. >> back there syria it is indeed getting worse. these people filmed getting out and leaving in the past 24 hours. it's partly fuel shortage, heating oil in particular. but it's also this too, intense fighting during the past two weeks in the once densely populated areas stretching from southern damascus suburbs down to the border with jordan itself. it's not just jordan, of course. syrian refugees now strung out across lebanon, iraq, northern syria and here over the frontier in turkey. where toys were hand out today and the little boys seemed pleased enough with them. these girls, however, appeared to have the weary stare of young people who have known already far too much of what life can bring. >> holman: the u.s. plans to send $10 million more in humanitarian aid to help feed refugees inside syria. the focus will be around aleppo in the north. there were clashes in egypt today as anti-government rallies marked the second anniversary of the revolution. at least four people were shot and killed in the city of suez. the scene in cairo's tahrir square was reminiscent of the massive crowds who helped topple president hosni mubarak. street battles with police broke out in cairo and elsewhere, and well more than 300 people were hurt. the protesters say the revolution was hijacked by islamists, who now control the government. thousands of anti-abortion protesters rallied in washington today against "roe versus wade." the supreme court decision that legalized abortion was handed down 40 years ago this week. this year's rally and march came in frigid temperatures. protesters carried signs and chanted slogans on the steps of the supreme court. abortion rights demonstrators staged a counter-demonstration there. republican senator saxby chambliss of georgia will not run for a third term in 2014. in a statement today, chambliss said, "this is about frustration." he said he's unhappy with president obama's direction and tired of partisan gridlock. chambliss had angered tea party forces when he supported tax increes as part of a plan to tame the federal deficit. wall street closed the week with another rally. the dow jones industrial average gained 70 points to close near 13,896. the nasdaq rose 19 points to close at 3,149. the s&p 500 finished above 1,500 for the first time since 2007. for the week, the dow gained nearly 2%; the nasdaq rose half a percent. those are some of the day's major stories. now, back to jeff. >> brown: we turn to israel, where prime minister benjamin netanyahu is working to build s coation afteruesd's election. the contest saw a surprisingly strong showing from a centrist party led by a former television personality. margaret warner is in jerusalem. i spoke with her a short time ago. >> so margaret, a few days after the election what kind of government seems to be taking shape? >> jeff, i'm told that bebenetanyahu is trying to put together a very broad coalition, not relying just on the trawl religious and ultra conservative and settler movement crowd that is in his current government. so he is worki with that surprise second place finisher to try to put together a very big coalition as well. a lot more votes than they really need. would if the people they're talking about join the government really span a range of viewpoints on everything from how to improve economic conditions for the middle class to say restarting peace talks with the principles. but it will take-- it could take a month to actually firm up. >> tell us a little bit about that surprise second place nisherbecae it really was a surprise, did get a lot of attention in the leadup. >> warner: it really was, he is 49 years-year-old. it was only a year ago this month that he announced he was leaving journalism to enter politics yet he came up with 19 seats. that was only one less than netanyahu and his likud party gotten tirely on their own. so he is the hot new property here. he already was a celebrity. he is the son of a holocaust survivor who ended up in the government here. but he had gone really quite his own direction. he's been a television talk show ht and a very popar columnist. he has written thrillers and children's books and a play am and he has even act in a movie. so really it was, as i said, just a year ago that he said he was leaving it all for politics. and his last column was something called where is the money? and that is where he let out, set up for his theo which is the burden to society has to be shared more equally. >> so margaret when you think about the implications of his coming government for any movement in the israeli-palestinian stggle or relatiosith the u.s. i just wonder what you have seen in israel in terms of division. how divided does it feel politically and culturally? >> well, it was just within israeli society, jeff, there is much greater division culturally than i even notice. i have been here for about six years. in the old divide used to be over how much and how to deal with the era of the palestinians, in particular and whether to give land for peace. the new divide is very cultural and i is between the ultraorthodox religious and also the pro settler nationalist movement which aren't the same. but the ultraorthodox are growing as a portion of the population because they have more children. and what they call the seculars even though they are observant jews. but they are, they separate their politics from their religion. and you really see ton the streetsment i men in many neighborhoods, and certainly in tel aviv people dress just as they do in the states. but there are a lot of neighborhoods and especially up here in jerusalem you see the orodoxveryere and men in their black hats and curls behind their ears and the women whose hair really is as covered as women in many muslim countries. and so there is a lot of resentment, especially among secular israelis about the special privileges that the orthodox and the settler movement get. everything from greater public spending, to the fact that the ultraorthodox with their young people say they are studying the torah are exempted from compulsory national military service that every other young israeli, male or female has to see. anthats reay u know, the most striking divide that i see here in israel. >> brown: so margaret, give us a flavor for what is coming next week. what are you reporting on. >> warner: jeff, we came here to look at the three big issues that newly elected president obama and prime minister netanyahu have to address. and that's the iranian nuclear program, the conflict in syria, and the israeli-palestinian issue. and so even as we reported on the elections, we've been looking at those three issues. of course we talked to a lot of israelis. but yesterday for instance we went up to the golan heights which is, you know, a ld th thesraes captured from the syrians. and that is really where the two countries meet up. you can see how very close the conflict is you can hear the boom of firing from the other side. and looked at the defensive measures that israeli is taking to try to prevent any spillover. we also this week went into gaza, just two months after the israeli-gaza conflict there, for example, to assess how people are feeling and in particular about how they feel about the prospects for israeli-palestinian peace. so we hope to have some textured stories ne week. >> brown: all right. we will look for those next week. margaret warner in jerusalem, thanks some of. >> warner: thank you, jeff. >> brown: margaret and the rest of our reporting team are filing stories on our web site. you can read their insights and analysis on our "world" page. >> sreenivasan: and to another newshour correspondent overseas- - ray suarez in davos, switzerland. he's moderating panels at the world economic forum, where there's been talk about the future of the european union. we spoke earlier this evening. >> ray, les start with the ws this week. the u.k. isaking som noises about backing away in some parts from the european union. what is the reaction there? where are all these european leaders are. >> well, here in davous the week was heavily dominated by news of the health of the joint european currency, the euro. and whether, in fact, the european union as it has come to be known would remain with one of its largest members. prime minister david cameron earlier this week dropped a bomb that he was going to later in this parliamentary term in a couple of years put britain's continued membership in the european union to a vote. and right now the union is not very popular among british politicians. so perhaps feeling the heat at home, cameron is responding this way? >> and what about the relationship with angela merkel of germany who put a tremendous amount of her own personal credibility on the line to help prop up the currency? >> well, you know, britain has long brideeled-- bridled under the rules that accompany its membership in the european unionment and david cameron has been hinting that the price of aying might be negotiati a better deafor hi country in some of the areas that the european union governs. >> well, angela merkel and other european politicians in response have said, wait a minute, britain can't work out os own special deal. there's long been grumbling on the continent about britain's trying to tug against the reigns that hold it to the continent. angela merkel is being credited this week in davous with saving the joint european currency, some of the economists who predicted last year during last year's conference that the euro was not long for the world and that greece would certainly be out of the currency r now conceding that greece is probably in to stay and that the euro is probably in to stay as well. but it is at no small cost to angela merkel and her party. >> help put this in perspective. in your blog post yesterday you were writing about the sentiment response from george sorros, big time investor as well as mohamed el arian who runs a large investment fund. >> george sorros was one of the people who earlier-- ear on id tat the european union had designed the currency badly. and that its weaknesses would probably become evident. he felt that he had been vindicated when the economic crisis hit both north america and europe and suddenly the governments of european countries in the eurozone had to step in and guarantee all kinds of loans. weakening the currency. sorros says that angela merkel's efforts in the intervening 14 months have probably saved the euro. he gives her a lot of credit but he still isn't high on the futurof the currency. he says that while germany has done very well by the currency, brought down the prices of its goods and made its exports affordable in many more places in the world, there is still serious problems with the euro that have to be taken into account. tonight i went to a high school here in this swiss alpine town where they invited all coppers, people attending the conference and locals to come hear european finance ministers talk about the future of the euro. and it's like discussing a patient that you thought was going to d andis now merely in intensive care. nobody likes to use the word austerity. the italian finance minister calls it responsibility. the german finance minister said oh, i don't like the sound of the word austerity it sounds so harsh in eng will be. i prefer the word discipline, which probably he jokes is a good german word. and earlier this week, the head of the imf called it consolidation. either way, it's painful. europe has 18 million unempyed, and these measures are going to have to stay in place for a long time to come. >> finally, ray, if you can give us a slice of the atmosphere n one of your posts you said it has been described by its critics, the entire conference and meeting as woodstock for gas bags, have they changed. are they trying to be more inclusive. is the agenda of the meeting any different? >> suarez: absolutely. in the year since 9/11, and then even reinforced in the years since the global-- global financial meltdown there's been a real attempt to bring in the critics of capitalism, bring in the critics of the world economic forum itself into the conference to be able to confront the leaders of industry and the leaders of government would come here year in and year out to deliver their critique. so not only is the crowd more diverse than it was a dozen years ago when i came for the first time, but also the matters under consideration are more diverse there is far more talk about global climate change. far more talk about inequality in wages. inside countries and then across dierent econom zones. a lot of worry about the poor, not necessarily out oval truism, but out of the understanding that if you can make the poor less poor, they will be better customers. and transnational business will prosper. >> all right, thanks, ray. and you can read ray's daily dispatches from davos on the rundown. >> brown: next, to the west african nation of mali. today, islamist fighters destroyed a bridge using explosives near the niger border. meanwhile, french forces pushed towards the rebel stronghold city of gao. but lindsey hilsum of independent television news reports that the malian army is now posing problems for the french military. >> reporter: the malian army is on the lookout for jihadis running from french bombing. soldiers in units fighting further north say the islamist fighters are well-armed and many of them very young. in the gendarmery in sevare, an officer brought out a 16-year- old he said had been captured near douentza, a town the jihadists had occupied until last week. the boy said he'd just been looking for work. >> ( translated ): they gave us clothes and shoes. we stayed with them, cooking for them. after a few days, one team of mutra hadeem went out to fight, but we stayed to cook for the others. >> reporter: he seemed bewildered. "i never carried a weapon," he said, "and my friend and i ran away when the fighting started." >> ( translated ): when the mutra hadeem left to give food to their colleagues at the heckpoints, we realized that we had to leave. when we were walking, we came face to face with a patrol of the malian army. they started asking us questions. when they realized that we stayed with the mutra hadeems, they took us with them to gendarmery to find out more about us. >> reporter: on a barren wasteland across town, a sign that both sides in this war can be cruel. and civilians are the ones who suffer. the well is spattered with blood-- the malian army is said to be responsible. you can just make out a body at the bottom of the pit. the old man shows us a second well. the french international federation for human rights says, in the last two weeks, malian soldiers in sevare have summarily murdered 11 tuaregs and arabs, accusing them of being jihadists. at least two bodies have been stuffed down these wells. the local people took this red earth and put it down the well to stop the body from smelling. this conflict is entering a very dangerous phase. most of the people i've met so far hate the jihadists. they want to support the malian army, but if the soldiers behave as badly as their enemies, then what is to stop the people from going to the other side? the french are only too aware of the problem. tuaregs and arabs farther north fear reprisals by the malian army-- to them, the jihadists might be the lesser of two evils. >> ( translated ): listen, it depends on the will of the local population. they have to choose their fate, whether or not to accept the jihadis. it's hard to accept a population that is in favor of the jihadis. so the malian people will decide the future of mali. >> reporter: french armor is far superior than that of al qaeda in the islamic maghreb, but if the people of northern mali fear and hate the malian troops fighting alongside the french, victory may me hollow and short- lived. >> brown: the malian army got a boost from britain today. its defense ministry will deploy a spy plane to mali to help with the military intervenon. >> sreenivasan: now, a story about trash. as the nation produces more and more, one city is trying to eliminate all of it. newshour correspondent spencer michels reports. >> reporter: each year, americans throw away about 250 million tons of garbage. that's roughly four pounds per person per day. you can find all manner of trash in a landfill-- old music stands, plastic bags, and a lot of items that could have been recycled, like bottles and cardboard. beyond the obvious blight they cause, landfills create environmental damage, including carbon dioxide emissions. they are monuments to waste. those concerns have prompted san francisco and a handful of other cities to aim for a once- unthinkable goal-- zero waste. in 2009, san francisco became the first city in the country to require that residents and businesses separate compostable items, like food scraps, and recyclable goods, like paper, metals, and plastic, into separate bins from their trash. and that has led to a big reduction in the amount of garbage headed to the landfill, according to san francisco mayor ed lee. >> we're proud of the 80% diversion rate, the highest in the country, certainly of any city in north america. >> reporter: lee likes to talk garbage. he touts the fact that the city's recycling and composting law has helped the city keep 80% of its waste out of landfills; the national recycling average is just 35%. but lee wants the city to go even further. >> all of us, as part of our culture of living here in the bay area, have appreciated the goals of our environment and climate change and doing everything that we can. i think the 80%, we're not going to be satisfied with that, spencer. we want 100% zero waste. this iwherwe'rgoing. >> reporter: is that possible? >> i think it is. it is possible. >> reporter: san francisco residents sven eberlein and debra baida think it's possible, too. they are avid recyclers and composters, so much so that they produce almost no trash. baida lists what goes into the compost bin. >> we put wrappers from our butter, put any meat or package, that kind of packaged paper food, soiled food wrappings, tissues, q-tips, paper napkins, which we don't have in our home. if those come in, those go there. soiled paper plates, milk cartons. >> i go to travel somewhere, and i'm, you know, i have, like, an apple and "where's the compost?" you know, and i have to throw it in the trash, and it kind of, you know, it just doesn't feel quite right, you know. >> reporter: but not all san franciscans are as enthusiastic as eberlein and baida. those who refuse to sort their garbage can face fines ranging from $100 to $1,000. >> and we're just in your neighborhood trying to educate residents about composting and recycling. >> reporter: teams of workers from the city are knocking on doors of residents who, unbeknownst to them, have had their garbage cans inspected by auditors early in the morning. on the evening we followed along, outreach workers were visiting homes which had put items in the wrong bins. >> we've noticed there's been a lot of confusion about what goes in what bin, and so i'm here to answer any questions. >> i think were good with recycling, but i guess could you give me a rundown on what goes in composting? >> if it was once alive-- soiled food-- it is compostable. >> reporter: so far, only warnings have been given out; no fines have been imposed yet. and city officials say the move toward zero waste is catching on. san francisco's 80-year-old private garbage company, which recently invented a new name for itself-- "recology"-- has been investing in recying and composting facilities, and trying to change san franciscans' perceptions of their garbage. >> where some see garbage, recology sees opportunity. working together, we've helped make san francisco america's greenest city. >> reporter: c.e.o. and president mike sangiacamo took us on a tour of recology's sprawling 22-acre composting facility northeast of san francisco. in rms of food wast composting, this is as good as it gets. we're creating a product that can be used on the soil to replenish nutrients that growing food crops take out of the soil. >> reporter: food scraps and yard clippings brought here-- some 400 tons a day- are turned into rich compost that is now being used by vineyards in napa and sonoma. in the rest of the nation, where composting is a rarity, 97% of food waste is disposed of in landfills, anthat causes environmental problems, according to regional epa director jared blumenfeld. >> about half the food we buy from the supermarket ends up going into the landfill. that's unacceptable. the stuff that rots and smells produces methane, which is a very, very potent greenhouse gas. and even if there's a cover on the top of just soil and stuff, that goes into the atmosphere and is really contributing in a large way to climate change issues. >> reporter: beyond the environntal benefits, recology and city officials point to another perk of moving the city toward zero waste-- jobs. at recology's massive recycling center, which has been inundated in recent weeks with wrapping paper left over from the holidays, 186 jobs have been created over the past ten years. most of the sorting done here is by hand. workers separate plastics, cardboard, cans and bottles so they can be packaged and shipped to recycled material markets, mostly in asia. >> reporter: for all the ballyhoo over san francisco's recycling and composting programs, there are skeptics. some san franciscans say city officials haven't verified those rosy recycling and composting statistics. >> it's a myth, it's a bogus figure. >> reporter: quentin kopp, a former state senator, and member of the san francisco board of supervisors, was part of an unsuccessful ballot effort last year to open the city's garbage contract up to a competitive bidding process. kopp says recology is inflating their recycling figures so they can boast that they are leading the nation >> yes, it is a gd idea to recycle. it's also a good idea to be honest to the public about how much of the refuse and garbage in san francisco is actually being recycled. nobody knows, except probably this company knows. they falsify the quantity, they falsify the type of material, and it's part of a bogus scheme to inflate the amount of recycling done. and city hall goes along with it because it makes the politicians at city hall look good. >> reporter: how do you know the figures are accurate? does the city verify them? >> yes, spencer, we actually do. not only does our department of the environment go out and do audits, we actually have auditors that go out there and make sure that we're all in compliance with the way we measure it, and using the state standards and the state process to do it. >> reporter: so there's no doubt in your mind that the 80% is real. >> oh, no doubt at all, no doubt at all in my mind. >> reporter: whatever the actual number is, recycling and composting don't come free. >> all of the services we provide are paid for by the customers whose material we're taking away. >> reporter: are they paying more in rates because of all this recycling and composting than they would otherwise? >> i would bet they're paying a little more. but if you compare rates in the bay area-- san francisco versus other communities-- we're right in the middle of the pack. and we're doing a lot more recycling than any other communities. >> reporter: residents currently pay about $28 a month for their trash bins; recycling and composting bins are free. but last month, recology requested a rate increase, and for the first time, wants to charge for composting and recycling bins, something recology says is necessary as the city moves towards eliminating its trash by 2020. >> sreenivasan: spencer reflects on his "trashy" assignment, the moves by his city to reduce waste, and the financial factors at play behind the scenes. his blog is on our web site. >> brown: and to the analysis of shields and brooks. that's syndicated columnist mark shield and "new york times" columnist david brooks. >> don't worry, we recycle. >> all right, so the week began with the inauguration, we talked on monday it ends with the white house appointment of the new chief of staff, mark. what is the new team what is the language you heard this week tell you about the president that barack oama want os to be? >> ihink like all re-elected presidents, he sees a mandate, an expanded vision of a mandate from the electoral victory. but he realizes time is short. and i think he does not show the same level of patience with the congress that he showed in his first term, that certain in patients, a realization that probably this is his best year in all likelihood, if history is any guide. i think he's been more sure footed. and i think a happier warrior as i saidearlier. nd i thinkhe people, dennis mcdonough who has chosen to be his chief of staff is somebody whom he likes, whom he is comfortable with, it is very much in his comfort zone. >> uh-huh. >> and probably the only person ever to be white house chief of staff who was a safety for john gagleardi, the winningest coach in college football history. >> i knew we have some trivia. >> actually, many cornerbacks were also chiefs of staff. >> he, as my colleague peter baker said, it's stirred, not shakenment so he is has not taken new people from outside. >> i mean i said a new team but it's almost -- >> it's all the same people, just in different chairs. and a lot of people got promoted, some people like quitener left. but we know o booma by now. he does not like to bring in fwrerb blood. he likes people he trust, he likes people like mcdonough who would throw themselves on a grain aid for them, extremely loyal, trustworthy and they are to the going to leak. so he sticks with those people. and he's been doing since he became presidt. as for his term, i sort of thing he is in danger through no fault of his own or only halfway of really wasting these which-- few months, precious months of the second term on budget. i think we're going have a bunch of squabbles. the chance of us getting tax reform are mines call. so well he probably find a mediocre fix for the reconciliation, budget stuff. but we'll spend relative little time on big stuff. i think judging still by the inauguration, he's thinking the long-term. he's thinking th republan party is extraordinarily weak. i'm going to try to go around the country and try to build a new majority on pretty liberal terms. and it's not about passing legislation over the next four years. it's been really weakening the other side and building up my stuff. >> what do you think, speaking of the republicans, here they are meeting. they are having their annual meeting in charlotte. and we've talked about this too. their weakness, you just mentioned it again. they're trying to figure out how their position going forward. >> i do think the president at least implicitly and tacitly recognized the states that he made in the first term. i think the emphasis, reappointment of richard corddry and mary jo white at the securities and exchange mission san acknowledgment that in 1989 when we had the savings & loan scandal in this country, 724 savings an loans went over, it cost the taxpayer $87 billion. a thousand savings and lobe executives went to jail, a thousand. and this tarp and the bailouts, the banks, left us with $800 billion over,, well over 700 to taxpayers. and we could count on two hands the number of bankers. sow i think there is a sense that he is did not address this. his administration was not aggressive in the first term. he wants to be in the second term. as far as the republicans are concerned, they are simply going through the terrible stages every defeated party does. one side says we lost because we didn't stick enough to our principals. the other side we lost because we were too dog matic and didn't reach out to thendeced. so the first inclination is always to blame your own candidate. you blame al gore if are you a democrat in 2000, john kerry in 2004, you blame john mccain. the republicans want to blame mitt romney, that's fine. but mitt romney is more popular than the republican party. i mean he got 47%, the republicans are dead in the water right now. so you know they're going through a difficult period. and they have got to try and figure out that they can't talk to the latino, the stest growing group in the country. they're basically not conversational with younger voters. they are asians have left them in droves. you know, they have just, they're an aging white party and in a country that is not less white-- that is less white each year. >> you farther bobby jindal gave a speech saying we're fighting the wrong fight that is one side of what he is talking about. >> the jindal speech is interesting because i think it is a sign that a lot of smart republicans like jindal understand the problem. but the jindal speech is still, it's as if your conservatives have learned to speak a special language within themselves about government and about you know, attacking liberal media. all the normal code words. and so jindal said some smart things in the abstract, we got to stop being a stupid party. we have to try to talk to outsiders. but he still lost in the prism of those code words, so does he tell a story about what it's like to be a waitress in ohio or what it's like to be a struggling hispanic worker in texas. he didn't talk that language. it's all about government, term limits, the old code word so it is's actually very hard to get outside the mental framework you've grown-up in. and the party is still stuck in that framework and i imagine it will be for months and maybe even years. it takes pain to force yourself. the key, it's not genius. if you want to win election you have to get people who didn't vote for to you vote four. and so focusing it and listening to those people that didn't vote for you is the step. and republicans still haven't taken that step. the people who are not already in your community what are they saying. that's the step. >> just to pick up one thing, there is the whole thing is what is the gimmick. must be some gimic. oh boy, it is social networking, it is-- it's -- >> electoral college. >> yeah, it's got to be something we can do that way. i mean that the other side is doing. radio with fdr republicans. and democrats said ronald reagan is good on television. question get somebody as good on tv as he is instead of that moment of introspection saying people found the other side, the other side are opponents to be more relevant, more real and more plausible to our lives and their lives than they found us. and that's-- it's a terrible thing to live with rejection but a losing party has to say what is it, and what you can't do is blame the voters. and i have heard ecoes of that the voters, that's the 47% of takers, you know, no wonder we can't win if they are all just parasites and worse. >> can i flip us into foreign policy because also this week there was hillary clinton testifying finally on benghazi. and then here is john kerry. first on benghazi, and hillary clinton s that still a live issue? >> i never thought it was a live issue. it was something to attack the administration on election fees. and there you know believe me there were false. but it was more a talking point. i think we've reached the final chapter. i think benghazi is over. and it was sort of a substitute for having a foreign policy debate. >> john kerry in his own testimony emphasizing the budget and how much the fiscal situation was a weakening american prestige because we look like a country that can't run ourselves. and b just weakening what we can do around the world. because we just don't have the resources to do it. so he very explicitly said that which is something admiral mike mullhen said when he was chairman of the joint chiefs. >> he also brought up things like climate, food security. >> so i'm a little more skeptical that that will really dominatement a lot of people always say nonmilitary stuff will dominate our foreign policy but when you have to face iran this year, one way or the other, are you going to be back to pretty traditional power politics. >> but we have chen two people in john kerry and uck hagel, whoa whose response is not immediate resort to military intervention. i mean both of them i think have records that that is established. as far as the benghazi hearings, it was an embarrassment. it really was. i mean i thought the republicans in the senate foreign relations committee, especially senator johnson of wisconsin, jor rand of kentucky, senator rand paul, excuse me, were just lightweights. i moan they were looking at me, we when through 9/11 in this country. and not once in any hearing thereafter did any member of this administration, administration sitting in power then be questioned by a member of congress, the other party or their own party, what was going on. what were you hiding. the presumption that, you know, somehow you had some information and weren't sharing it and i thought hillary clinton handled herself well. i thought she was a grown-up in a meeting of add liss-- adolescents. >> she gave it back pretty tough. >>he if you n't take i hillaryclinton, don't start. i think we did learn that. >> what do you think of her, well, the performance this time but also to you we can look back at four years, what will stand out about her time. >> i think she is regarded as a successful secretary of state for sure. the question i would have is what was independent. and this is something i'm frankly ignorant on. i think people cover this closely. what was a clinton initiative. what do we say, aside from the foreign policy being paid by the president, what was the foreign policy she was responsible for. she did a lot of traveling. and she did a lot of talking to people. but what was her iniative? and i confess i have trouble, there was some emphasis on women, some other things like that but as far as a big shift in american foreign policy, that was hillary clinton's idea, she pushed it through, she executed this policy, it's tough to distinguish anything she did individually from what the president wants. >> do you have an answer to that? >> i don't. i mean i think it's a legitimate question. i am not sure what the great view of the world is. i mean it's been one of putting out iraq and afghanistan and putting those behind us and endi ten years of war. but beyond that, i mean, and dealing obviously on a day-to-day basis with all of the problems that the world puts in front of you, which they continue to do and will in the next four years as well, even more so. but i don't, i'm not sure that there was ever sort of a kissinger overarching theory, a strategy, at least i was unaware of it. >> in our last 30 seconds on this larger question of where we are now, this rebalancing tour, domestic issues, perhaps some qution of whher we are sort of disengaginging. some fears of disengaginging. what do you think? >> i think events will change that. like i said, iran, the middle east, they never let you down, something will happen. and so i do not think, we want to disengaging. i think bipartisan but i don't think we are going to get. >> we want to but we won't get to. >> i mean, and we haven't even mentioned china. >> all that asia represents, you know n north korea, south korea, japan. i mean it is everywhere. even before we get to north afica. >> all right, mark shlds, david brooks, thank you both so much. >> sreenivasan: finally, tonight's edition of "need to know" compares differences in how the u.s. and other countries deal with claims of medical malpractice. it's the second of two reports funded by the supporters of the non-profit, non-partisan advocacy group common good. in this excerpt, producer william brangham looks at a solution in denmark. >> after she sens her two young boys off to school, 34-year-old single mom januariette maria boards the bus for the hospital near her rural town in denmark. for several years starting around 2007 she complained to her doctor about bad headaches and feeling exhausted an nauseous all the time. but she says he told her the symptoms were all in her head. >> at one point i go and goog el my systems and kidney disease comes up and i show that to my doctor but he says like he said those other times, there's really nothing wrong with you. >> reporter: turns out she did have kidney disease. and now three days a week she spends five hours hooked up to dialysis. without a kidney transplant, she'll live like this for the rest of her life. back in 2006, stien larson felt a bulge in the back of his throat. >> in going to the specialist and they pretty fast concerns that this was cancer and had to be treated. >> aggressive radiation treatment was supposed to begin within weeks. t there was a backlog at the hospital. and so his treatment was delayed by months. his tumor kept growing, and his chances for survival went down. >> how much do they grow? >> it was on the way out, outside of my mouth. >> you could visualize it when he opened his mouth. >> if these people lived in the united states and they wanted some compensation for what had happened with their cases, they basically have one option. you hire a lawyer and you take your case to court. but here in denmark, they have a very different approach. instead of suing your doctor or hospital like we do in the u., he you dect your complaint to this office, the patient insurance association. martin erickson is the deputy director. >> so let's say i'm a patient and i believe that i have been hurt by a doctor or a hospital. what do i do? >> all you have to do is actually to fill in a claims form. you can even fill in on a web page. >> you done need a lawyer. >> don't node a lawyer. >> does it cost any money to file. >> it's absolutely free for the patient. only has to fill in the form. that is all you have to do. >> the patient's complaint about their injury then goes to an independent panel of lawyers, doctors and administrators. there is no courtroom. and no testimony. they examine a patient's medical records and hold it against this standard. would an experienced specialist in the field have acted differently, thereby avoiding the injury. if so, then a patient is offered compensation. all paid for by danish taxpayers. >> need to know airs tonight on most pbs stationsment. >> again the major developments of the day, a federal court ruled president obama's a pointments to the national labor relations >> sreenivasan: "need to know" airs tonight on most pbs stations. >> brown: again, the major developments of the day: a federal court ruled president obama's appointments to the national labor relations board made during a congressional recess were unconstitutional. and pentagon officials said they've begun eliminating 46,000 temporary civilian workers in the face of looming budget cuts. a question-- how did illness affect some of the most famous authors of western literature? kwame holman has more on our online story. >> holman: john milton suffered blindness, the bronte sisters died of tuberculosis, and shakespeare may have contracted syphilis. famous authors and their ailments-- that's the subject of a new book by dr. john j. ross. find his conversation with jeff on "art beat." on "lunch in the lab," a mistranatiospres a lse rumor about cloning neanderthal babies. get the science behind the story. and is the national debt harmful to children? paul solman answers a viewer's question on "making sense." all that and more is on our web site, newshour.pbs.org. hari. >> sreenivasan: and that's the newshour for tonight. on monday, the daily download looks at social media in the workplace. i'm hari sreenivasan. >> brown: and i'm jeffrey brown. "washington week" can be seen later this evening on most pbs stations. we'll see you online, and again here monday evening. have a nice weekend. ank you and good night. >> major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ moving our economy for 160 years. sf, e enne tt coects us. >> and by the bill and melinda gates foundation. dedicated to the idea that all people deserve the chance to live a healthy, productive life. >> and with the ongoing support of these institutions and foundations. and... >> this program was made possible by the corporation for public broadcasting. and by contributions to your pbs statn fr viewers le you. thank you. captioning sponsored by macneil/lehrer productions captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org
CSPAN
Feb 2, 2013 9:30pm EST
? devoted to economics or foreign policy, iraq and iran, what ever it should be. at cbs we made a deal about never giving you the questions or categories, because you are supposed to keep that distance. >> do you feel any sense of discomfort at having to participate in what you did this time. >> this is the first time i have that this way and this was new, and basically -- janet called me and said, this time we want to divide this up into six categories, and i said, fine. you did not have to say in what order were anything but i think you really don't need to in today's sophisticated world. >> but you did. and this hadn't happened before so why was the change. >> with the commission said to me was that they were keen on two things. and the commission is running this. the three of us and candy are not rolling this. >> by your jim lehrer. >> -- you are jim lehrer. >> this is how they ask and here is how the imitation goes to the debate. and if under these rules, would you do this certain fang -- i found out what they propose and made the decision, i would do that and here is what they sa
MSNBC
Jan 31, 2013 4:00pm EST
incorrect when you said that the surge would be the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since vietnam. were you correct or incorrect? yes or no? >> when given a chance to respond, here is what hagel said. >> the comment i made about the most dangerous foreign policy decision since vietnam was about not just the surge, but the overall war of choice going into iraq. >> that point found broad support in our latest nbc news/"wall street journal" poll with nearly 6 in 10 americans saying the entire iraq war was not worth it. let's remember that the mccain/hagel grudge goes way back to comments, well, like these. >> well, i think our invasion and occupation of iraq represents one of the great blunters of american history, and we will pay a high price for this for a long time. >> now, that would be in march 2008. you remember, it's the year that barack obama won his first term as president defeating none other than john mccain. do you think mccain is still angry that hagel backed obama? holding a judge? no, never. if mccain played the betrayed besty, fellow republican lindsey g
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 563 (some duplicates have been removed)